YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Draft by the State Transportation Commission on July 21, 2018 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Draft by the State Transportation Commission on July 21, 2018 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Dear Reader: I present to you the 2019-2023 Five-Year Transportation Program, a detailed accounting of the Michigan Department of Transportation’s (MDOT) stewardship of the highway, bridge, public transit, rail, aviation, marine, and nonmotorized programs. This transportation program represents $11 billion in multi-modal transportation investments over the next five-year timeframe. The 2019-2023 Five-Year Transportation Program utilizes all available federal and state funding in order to progress toward the vision and goals set forth in the 2040 MI Transportation Plan, the state long-range transportation plan. Despite greater certainty about future investment levels, decision-makers will need to be strategic in the future, as funding levels continue to lag the overall needs across transportation modes. Future investments will also need to take into account rapidly changing vehicle and infrastructure technologies that may alter the transportation system as we have known it. MDOT annually updates its Five-Year Transportation Program, which provides information on multi-modal revenues available, expected investments, performance measures, and a list of planned road and bridge projects. Projects presented within this program are within MDOT's jurisdiction, which includes all state-owned roads/highways with an I, M or US designation (for example: I-94, M-21, and US-23). For the other modes presented (public transportation and aviation), the majority of the assets are owned, managed and operated by other entities. Therefore, the federal and state funding represented in this document may be only a portion of the total investment. MDOT consistently works to deliver the program in the most effective and efficient way possible. MDOT is determined to provide the highest quality integrated transportation services for economic benefit and improved quality of life in the safest and most efficient way possible. The department is always striving to be better, faster, cheaper, safer, and smarter. Read more about MDOT policies and programs on the department's website at www.michigan.gov/mdot. Thank you for your interest in the Five-Year Transportation Program.

Sincerely,

Kirk T. Steudle

2 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Multi-modal Programs...... 34 Table of Contents Public Transportation Revenue Assumptions ...... 35 Aviation Revenue Assumptions...... 38 Celebrating 20 Years of the Public Transportation Investment Strategies...... 39 Five-Year Transportation Program (5YTP)...... 5 Aviation Investment Strategy...... 42

Introduction...... 5 Highlighting Upcoming FY 2019...... 43-46

Mobility Innovation, Technology and Infrastructure...... 10 Performance Measurement and System Condition...... 48 Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAV)...... 10 MDOT Performance Measurement...... 48 Highway Pavement Condition Goal...... 48 Highlighting Future or Federal Performance Measures...... 49 Ongoing Major Projects...... 13 Bridge Condition Goal...... 50 Safety Goals...... 51 Gordie Howe International Bridge...... 13 Multi-Modal Performance Measures...... 52 Lafayette Bascule Bridge...... 14 I-94 Jackson Area...... 14 Economic Impacts of Transportation I-75 Monroe County...... 15 I-94 Kalamazoo County ...... 16 Investments ...... 57 I-196 Grand Rapids...... 17 Bus Rapid Transit and Regional Transit Planning...... 18 Highway Economic Impacts...... 57 Airport Updates in Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo...... 19 Public Transportation Economic Impacts...... 58 I-75 Modernization in Oakland County...... 21 Aviation Economic Impacts...... 60 I-94 Modernization in Detroit...... 22 Marquette Township US-41/M-28 Roundabouts and Regional Service Areas...... 61 Share-Use Path Tunnel Project...... 23 Project Identified by the 21st Century Infrastructure Report...... 24 Road and Bridge Project Lists...... 62 21st Century Pilot Update...... 25 Bay Region ...... 62 Public Comments...... 26-27 Grand Region ...... 64 Metro Region ...... 66 North Region...... 71 Five-Year Transportation Program Process..... 28 Southwest Region...... 73 Superior Region...... 75 University Region...... 77 Revenue Assumptions and Investment Strategies...... 29 MDOT Region Contact Information...... 80

Overview...... 29 Highway Program Revenue Assumptions...... 30 Acronyms and Definitions...... 81 - Highway Investment Program FY 2019-2023...... 32

3 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

4 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

For the past 20 years, the Michigan Department of Transportation’s (MDOT) Five-Year Transportation Program (5YTP) has served as an innovative communication tool designed to ensure an open, transparent, and optimized transportation asset management process. MDOT proudly celebrates the 20th anniversary of Gov. Rick Snyder and Director Kirk Steudle the 5YTP and its recognition in the transportation Further guiding MDOT’s investment decisions industry as a key resource for statewide planning are department goals established by the State and asset management. Today, all transportation Transportation Commission (STC) for state-owned departments across the United States are working transportation infrastructure. The 5YTP has al- to incorporate new federal Transportation lowed the department to prioritize projects using Performance Management plans to align with a goal-oriented, performance-based approach the federal govern- rather than a “worst first” approach. ment’s guidance, while at MDOT our Since its inception, the 5YTP has optimized business practices project delivery and has provided the STC, the have incorporated Michigan Legislature, partnering agencies, performance and the public with a list of transportation standards and projects planned for the next five years that are capital investment in alignment with the established goals of the strategies since the department. This plan reports on the road and Gov. John Engler, first 5YTP drafted bridge projects expected to be delivered, and also holding first 5YTP, 1999-2003 in 1998. includes information on major projects, funding

“ For the first time in MDOT history, we have mapped out our long-term investment strategy, complete with a list of the specific road and bridge improvements we are planning each year between 1999 and 2003. The prioritized plan benefits our customers, especially businesses, who will be able to plan for interruption and inconveniences.” James R. DeSana, MDOT Director 1997-2001

5 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

issues, investment strategies, performance measures, and the economic benefits of investments in all modes of transportation. Over the years, the 5YTP has ushered through important legislative road funding packages at the state and federal levels, including Build Michigan, Jobs Today, Preserve First, the American Rebuilding and Recovery Act (ARRA), and the most recent fuel and registration changes for the benefit of transportation improvements. One major challenge of long-term planning is that transportation funding is largely subject to an annual appropriation, meaning that transportation funding can fluctuate annually, requiring adjustments across the board. However, Director Kirk Steudle and Gov. Jennifer Granholm the 5YTP has, for 20 years, remained a platform to In addition, the 5YTP includes the review of all clearly report MDOT’s planned highway, aviation, potential road and bridge projects to determine bus, marine, rail, and nonmotorized projects several how the planned treatments will impact asset years in advance to the greatest degree possible. conditions and performance targets. It requires coordination among the many areas of the A Multi-Modal, Collaborative Process department involved in project selection, includ- In 1973, the Michigan State Highway Department ing safety, bridges, and operations. Candidate became the Michigan Department of Transportation, projects are discussed with local road agencies, signaling the beginning of what would come to metropolitan planning agencies, and rural task be a total transportation agency. From that point forces, where input opportunities are offered to forward, the department would begin to plan for the public. Partner agencies and the public are all modes of transportation, including highway, encouraged to review the plan early within the nonmotorized, passenger and freight rail, local and project development process prior to including the intercity transit, aviation, and ferry systems. All are selected projects in the Statewide Transportation inextricably linked, connecting workers, consumers, Improvement Program (STIP). While the project businesses, and economic markets throughout selection process has been tweaked over the our state, supporting Michigan’s economy and the past 20 years, it remains designed to allow the people who live here. public to be informed of changes in cost, scope, or project schedules. This is no small feat for a The goal for an integrated transportation network statewide program that delivers, on average, is logical and desirable, but implementation of more than $1.5 billion per year in reconstruction such an undertaking is complex. To begin with, and repair projects. there are four federal departments that require coordination, including the Federal Highway In addition to the highway portion of the program, Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, the 5YTP addresses aviation programs utilizing the Federal Aviation Administration, and the federal, state and local funds, providing the public Federal Rail Administration. information on investment strategies, goals, and

6 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

accomplishments from this sector. Aviation, both of limited resources. The 5YTP remains a critical commercial and general, serves a vital role in tool used in the coordination of projects early addressing business and personal mobility needs in the planning process to ensure government throughout the state and provides access to the accountability and the ultimate success of select- global transportation system. ed projects. Although the majority of Michigan’s passenger The 5YTP serves as an essential communication transportation program is delivered locally, state and public relations tool for everyone - those funds are appropriated each year at the program within the department, stakeholders, the STC, and level and used by MDOT to support local transit the public. It reflects the priorities of the depart- operation and capital projects. The investment ment, identifies funding available, and establishes strategies laid out in the 5YTP help to guide the timetable for project delivery. It is truly an annual state funding requests and demonstrate integral part of this organization and provides that each appropriation request is supported by the information pipeline for our business from an STC-approved investment plan. project development through to delivery. Without the 5YTP, MDOT would not be the effective and Despite challenges in coordinating projects and efficient organization it is today. We look forward goals among a large number of stakeholders, the to celebrating another 20 years of successful public expects that their government will do so five-year plans. without question and with careful stewardship

FHWA Transportation Performance Management from www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm

7 Q&A with MDOT Chief Operations Officer Mark Van Port Fleet How has the 5YTP improved asset management at MDOT? The 5YTP, along with our condition forecasting tools, has allowed the department to drive projects that are focused on a system condition approach versus a worst first approach. By having the projects selected to achieve system condition improvement be public facing, it has become harder for changes not consistent with an asset management strategy to gain priority and slow our progress to better asset conditions. It has created a strong public expectation that the projects in the program will be delivered. We have maintained strong control over a program driven to improve asset condition. How does having five years of projects planned into the future benefit the agency? Having five years of projects defined has provided more certainty in what our resources are developing and delivering. Resource planning and consultant contracting can be better planned and executed. We are better able to balance the impacts of large or impacting projects in the program and to advance or delay work as needed with the assurance that we will still use all available funding for the right purpose. How does having five years of projects planned into the future benefit the public? What gets planned gets done. The public benefits from knowing when road work is coming and can plan appropriately. It provides for the needed time for public input and program adjustments to make projects more context-friendly. It helps businesses plan to better respond to traffic adjustments of construction. It makes MDOT more accountable to the public. Q&A with Chief Administrative Officer Laura J. Mester What do you think is the most important contribution the 5YTP has made? It has provided immense stability in our program and it retains project/ program decision-making with MDOT, where it should remain. How has the 5YTP improved the asset management process at MDOT? The department has been disciplined in selecting projects that meet specific criteria based on a mix of fixes. The 5YTP provides a look at all potential projects and whether the treatment will impact conditions and targets. It has also fostered better coordination between the various bureaus and offices involved in project selection and execution of the plan. How does having five years of projects planned into the future benefit the agency? The plan helps the department demonstrate how it will pay for planned projects and the timetable it will follow. In addition, it provides flexibility, if needed, to move projects from one year to the next within a

8 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

constrained financial environment. In addition, it communicates to everyone involved in project selection and execution the priorities of the department. How does having five years of projects planned into the future benefit the public? It can be used by local communities to coordinate their projects with MDOT’s planned projects. In addition, it demonstrates how the department is utilizing its resources for specific capital projects across the state. What do you think is the most important contribution the 5YTP has made? The 5YTP plan serves as a great communication and public relations tool for everyone – those within the department, the STC, and the public. It reflects the priorities of the department, identifies funding available and establishes the timetable for project delivery.

Comments from Bureau of Transportation Planning Director David Wresinski In 1999, MDOT published the first 5YTP. The identification of five years of MDOT projects was first conceived by then-State Transportation Director James R. DeSana. The tradition continued through all subsequent directors, including current director Kirk Steudle. It was Director DeSana’s belief that communities should not have to guess what and where MDOT would be working on the trunkline system and for the last 20 years MDOT has removed the guesswork by publishing a rolling 5YTP. Today, we are pleased to present the 2019-2023 5YTP. I remember the drafting of the first 5YTP well, as I was working in a position in a temporary capacity and was charged with determining the road and bridge project commitments that would be conveyed in the first edition of the document. I recall hand-coloring projects in various template categories to differentiate “capacity projects” from “new road projects” and “system preservation” projects. Technology at that point had not caught up with Director DeSana's vision. The MDOT Bureau of Transportation Planning (BTP) has had the responsibility for developing the 5YTP for the past two decades. It is an effort that involves individuals from across the organization but the fine work of assembling the document occurs in the BTP and we are proud of the effort and the outcome. The 5YTP has been instrumental in aligning MDOT funding and staffing resources and significantly improved transparency regarding project activities and program priorities. State legislation now requires that MDOT annually publish a 5YTP. Typically, I don’t provide commentary within these documents but this year marks two milestones: the release of 20th anniversary document and my last year as BTP director. Later this year, I will retire with 33 years of service to this fine organization and I look back with many great memories and accomplishments. I take great pride in both and I look forward to the release of subsequent 5YTPs that will occur under new leadership of the BTP.

9 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Mobility Innovation, Technology, and Infrastructure The state of Michigan has always been a pioneer in transportation and automotive innovation. This section of the Five-Year Transportation Program highlights connected vehicle technologies and reviews major trunkline infrastructure projects. $8 Million Michigan Mobility Challenge Connected and On May 30, 2018, Gov. Rick Snyder announced the $8 Million Michigan Mobility Challenge grant initiative to Automated Vehicles address core mobility gaps for seniors, persons with dis- PlanetM is a mobility program initiated by Gov. Snyder abilities, and veterans across the state. MDOT will distribute to support research and development of connected and $8 million to fund multiple innovative pilot transportation automated vehicles (CAV) and infrastructure in Michigan. projects of varying size based on pilot submissions and The program involves collaboration among the automo- proposed service areas in urban, rural, and suburban bile industry, universities, and all levels of government. communities. This effort is a collaboration between The following paragraphs discuss efforts that are under- MDOT, the Michigan Economic Development Corp., way to ensure that the state of Michigan continues to be Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, a leader in CAV technology. Michigan Department of Military and Veteran Affairs, and Michigan Department of Civil Rights. Many newer vehicles already have systems that warn the driver to stay in their lane, or even stop the vehicle, if the driver is distracted before an incident occurs. These systems exemplify the early stages of CAV technology. Whether mandated by the government or demanded by consumers, MDOT must be ready for the changes these technologies will bring to the use and maintenance of the road network.

10 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

What’s the difference between connected • There are also RSUs at road weather information system and automated vehicles? (RWIS) sites that can alert vehicles to the presence Connected vehicles and automated vehicles are two of ice or hazardous conditions, giving the driver the different technologies that are both developing and will information they need to slow down or change driving have fundamental impacts on transportation. behavior. This technology is also being used to alert A connected vehicle is a car or truck that is equipped drivers to the length of wait times at the border, with dedicated short-range communication devices, allowing commercial vehicles to choose their routes or primarily two-way radio frequencies reserved by the otherwise plan their schedules appropriately. federal government for transportation safety purposes. Automated vehicles, also known as autonomous vehicles, This allows the car to either communicate with other are cars or trucks that sense their surroundings with such vehicles on the roadway or with roadway infrastructure, techniques as radar, light detection and ranging tech- such as traffic lights. This communication is often referred nology, global positioning systems (GPS), and computer to as vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) or vehicle-to-infrastructure vision. The vehicle uses these technologies to identify (V2I) and is already being incorporated into new vehicles its location in the environment, thereby determining an and roadway infrastructure. MDOT is focused primarily appropriate navigation path and keeping itself on the on V2I testing and implementation, as this technology is road while avoiding obstacles. This potentially can allow dependent on infrastructure outfitted with sensors and the passenger in the car to be just that: a passenger and communication devices. not an operator, although this technology is still in its very beginning phases. Examples of MDOT efforts in this field, which involve infrastructure communicating with the vehicle or operator, include: CAV Technology Strategic Plan MDOT’s mission is to “Provide the highest quality inte- • By 2019, 350-plus miles of major arterials in southeast grated transportation services for economic benefit and Michigan will be equipped with V2I technology, improved quality of life.” This mission has been applied allowing equipped vehicles to communicate with to CAV and intelligent transportation systems (ITS) in the infrastructure such as intersections, traffic lights, and Connected and Automated Vehicle Technology Strategic other roadway elements. Plan, a high-level guidance document that MDOT uses to • In west Lansing, nine intersections of Saginaw Highway incorporate CAV/ITS technology department-wide. The are equipped with smart signals that can broadcast the plan can be found online at www.michigan.gov/its. It lays “phase” of the traffic light. For example, a car equipped out the design for aligning MDOT’s long-term transporta- with this technology would receive a warning that the tion plans with recent advances in technology and policy light is about to change from green to yellow or yellow regarding CAV. A core element of the plan centers on the to red. The driver would be alerted to the change inclusion of rapidly developing technologies in the digital in phase, especially if it appears the vehicle will not communications and vehicle-embedded automated be able to stop in time at its current speed. This is a systems. MDOT strategies must account for changes in technology called Signal Phase and Timing, or SPaT, these important technologies, in addition to traditional intended to reduce crashes and reduce congestion. communication and ITS technologies. • Similar to SPaT, there are also work zones equipped with road side units (RSUs) that can broadcast construction zone information to equipped vehicles, alerting drivers to the need to slow down and change lanes.

11 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Implementation and Test Facilities of DSRC systems between roadside radios and TARDEC MDOT is amid a major reconstruction and modernization convoy vehicles was conducted on I-69 in St. Clair County. project on a 17.7-mile section of I-75 in Oakland County. These tests are an important step toward future testing As part of the project, connected infrastructure was of platooning and automated technologies and installed to support construction activities and long-term furthering the automobile research and development operational needs in the corridor. Temporary connected focus in Michigan. vehicle technology will broadcast work zone messages to support the testing of work zone information and safety applications. Permanent connected vehicle infrastructure will be installed at each construction segment of the American Center for Mobility project. Using leading roadway solutions from 3M, the current I-75 modernization project work zone in Oakland The American Center for Mobility (ACM) is a testing and County will be transformed to improve safety for drivers product development facility for CAV technology at the and to test advanced V2I technologies on the CAV of 335-acre historic Willow Run in Ypsilanti Township. The the future. 3M will be providing MDOT with advanced ACM will allow automotive industry and government all-weather lane markings, retroreflective signs with smart agencies to test vehicles, roads, and infrastructure sign technology and dedicated short-range communica- and communication systems in a variety of physical tion (DSRC) devices for V2I communications. The updated, and weather environments. The facility offers unique modern materials will allow for redundancy and greater real-world features such as a highway test loop where machine vision, as well as improved driver safety on the vehicles can travel at highway speeds. This nonprofit roadways. facility is a collaborative effort with MDOT, the Michigan Economic Development Corp., the University of Michigan, The U.S. Army Tank Automated Research, Development, Business Leaders for Michigan, and Ann Arbor SPARK. The and Engineering Center (TARDEC) and MDOT collabo- ACM helps support the PlanetM initiative for Michigan to rated to test automobile and mobility technologies on be a leader in transportation and automotive innovation. real-world environments using Michigan roads. Testing ACM also offers an opportunity for larger-scale research, development, and testing due to both the size of the facility and more diverse infrastructure. ACM has the potential to be the last stop of testing before vehicles are on the road, as well as the potential to be a place where vehicle certification could happen in the future. Michigan recently enacted several pieces of legislation intended to keep Michigan at the forefront of autonomous vehicle testing, research, and deployment. Among other features, this legislation enables on-road testing of technology, commercial vehicle platooning, and establishes the ACM.

American Center for Mobility located at Willow Run.

12 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

pendent fairness mon- Highlighting itor. On Jan. 20, 2016, the WDBA announced Future or Ongoing three short-listed respondents that would Major Projects move forward in the competitive procurement process. On Nov. Gordie Howe 10, 2016, the WDBA issued the Request for International Bridge Proposals (RFP) inviting The Gordie Howe International Bridge (GHIB) project is a proponents to submit formal proposals to design, build, new freeway-to-freeway border crossing system between finance, operate and maintain the GHIB project. The WDBA Detroit, Michigan, and Windsor, Ontario, that will improve will oversee the work of the P3, manage the concession the flow of international trade between the United States agreement and payments, and set and collect tolls. and Canada at the busiest border crossing between the two countries. Almost all pre-construction activities in Canada, including land acquisition, demolition and the construction of The project has three primary elements: a new Detroit the parkway that will connect Highway 401 to the GHIB, River crossing (bridge), new state-of-the-art border have been completed. The WDBA has retained numerous inspection areas on each side of the river for the U.S. and consultants, including an Owner’s Engineer in April Canadian border services agencies (plazas), and direct 2018, to support them through design review, providing connections to highway systems in each country (I-75 in technical advice and monitoring and overseeing the con- the United States and Highway 401 in Canada via the new struction activities of the private-sector partner through $1.4 billion Rt. Hon. Herb Gray Parkway). inspections, compliance reviews and audits. MDOT has retained land acquisition, demolition, and environmental On June 15, 2012, an interlocal Crossing Agreement was consultants to assist its efforts to acquire properties signed by Gov. Rick Snyder and Canadian officials to pro- located in the GHIB footprint on the U.S. side. Utility vide a framework for a Canadian Crossing Authority, now relocations to accommodate the new U.S. Port of Entry known as the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (WDBA), are underway, including the relocation and replacement to implement the new crossing under the oversight of of several siphons and combined sewer crossings as part a jointly established International Authority. Design, of the I-75 inlay project. construction, financing, operation and maintenance of the GHIB will be performed by a private entity through a The WDBA expects to announce its Preferred Proponent public-private partnership (P3) agreement. and begin final contractual negotiations in June 2018 and announce the private-sector partner by the end of The WDBA is managing the procurement process for the September 2018. Construction on the new bridge will design, construction, operation and maintenance of the begin this year. Implementation of this project will be new bridge through a P3. In July 2015, the procurement complex, lengthy, and must comply with the Crossing process was launched with the issuance of a request Agreement. Once the private-sector partner is selected, for qualifications for the P3 concessionaire. Six North construction is expected to take four years. The GHIB American and international respondent teams submitted will be publicly owned by the State of Michigan and the responses that were evaluated by WDBA officials and Government of Canada. partner organizations under the supervision of an inde-

13 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Lafayette Bascule Bridge The Lafayette Bascule Bridge was constructed in 1938 and carries traffic on M-13/M-84 (Lafayette Avenue) over the east channel of the Saginaw River in Bay City. The 456-foot structure is comprised of two approach spans and a 185-foot rolling lift span, allowing for navigation of maritime traffic. More than 8 million vehicles travel across this structure every year, with an average of 443 bridge openings per year during the navigational season. At nearly 80 years old, the Lafayette Bascule Bridge is considered to be in poor condition due to the superstructure rating. A comprehensive feasibility study was performed in 2013 to evaluate superstructure repair versus replacing The Lafayette Bridge when constructed in 1938. the structure. Replacement was recommended due to the scour criticality of the existing structure, the age of the existing substructure, and constructability issues requiring specialized and highly complex repairs. The proposed cross section of the new structure will consist of two 12-foot driving lanes, an auxiliary 12-foot lane to use during maintenance operations, a 14-foot multi-use pathway to accommodate US Bicycle Route 20, and a 5-foot sidewalk for pedestrian traffic. A full detour will be required while the existing bridge is demolished and the new bridge is constructed. It is estimated that this detour will be in effect for 24 months. The Lafayette Bridge today. This project has been selected to use the construction manager/general contractor (CMGC) delivery method. I-94 Jackson Area Contractors will be required to show experience with the The I-94 Freeway Modernization Study was completed in specialized construction unique to movable bridges. This 2007 and includes recommendations to modernize and type of contract will also give designers more certainty upgrade a 9-mile section of I-94 from M-60 to Sargent in determining which construction methods will be Road in Jackson County. The recommended project most advantageous. Additionally, there is opportunity to includes: develop a shared-risk approach for work items that carry the most uncertainty. The total investment on this project • Constructing an additional travel lane in each direction. is estimated to be $49 million. • Replacing bridges to meet current design standards, including underclearance requirements. • Redesigning seven interchanges. • Improving operations and safety.

14 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

A phasing strategy was developed for the entire I-94 Freeway Modernization Study and was included in the I-75 Monroe County Final Environmental Impact Study. The project was I-75 in Monroe County was originally constructed in 1956 divided into three phases. Phase 1 has been completed as a four-lane interstate freeway. It was widened to three with the reconstruction of the Hawkins Road bridge in lanes in each direction in 1977, and the pavement was 2007 and the Dettman Road bridge in 2008, and the reconstructed in 1988. I-75 is a vital link to Detroit and to reconstruction of the Sargent Road interchange and the rest of the state for vehicular travel and commercial removal of the I-94 Business Loop bridge in 2012. freight. On average, it carries 15,500 commercial vehicles per day. The route is also crucial for international trade as Starting in 2018, MDOT will continue making improve- it provides a link to the Ambassador Bridge and the future ments to I-94 in Jackson County, including: GHIB. The Michigan Truck Tonnage map visually shows • Reconstructing 1.4 miles of freeway between Lansing the importance of this link to freight and trade. Avenue and Elm Road; Much of the existing pavement is rated in poor condi- • Resurfacing 3.5 miles between Lansing Road and tion. The base of this section of I-75 has been failing over M-60 and resurfacing 4 miles between Elm Road and the last 20 years, and the pavement has required annual Sargent Road. concrete patching, which causes significant vehicular • Rebuilding and redesigning the I-94/Cooper Street in- delay. Bridges in this area are also rated poor, and bridge terchange, including the addition of new roundabouts under clearance needs to be improved to accommodate on each side of the new bridge and reconstructing modern freight-haulers. each of the ramps. The I-75 reconstruction project in Monroe County will • Replacing and widening the bridge over the include reconstructing pavement from the Ohio state line Grand River. north to Erie Road. The project also includes interchange • Providing a merge/weave lane between the improvements and the replacement of 11 bridges and Cooper Street and Elm Road interchanges two bridge superstructures. The adjacent table displays the location of the planned bridge work. The project As part of the 2018 project, I-94 will be shifted approxi- is assembled into five phases. Construction in the first mately 60 feet south of its current location. The widening of the Cooper Street bridge and the bridge reconstruction over the Grand River will require right-of-way acquisition primarily on the south side of I-94. The bridge over the Grand River and the Cooper Street bridge will be built wide enough and long enough to accommodate the future traffic needs for this corridor. In 2020 and 2021, the I-94 interchanges at M-60 and Elm Road will be reconstructed. These projects have been programmed, and an environmental clearance reevaluation is underway. The interchanges will be built to accommodate the future capacity and operational needs for I-94.

15 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

phase was completed in 2016. Two southern sections are currently scheduled in 2019 and 2021. The four remaining phases include: #2. Ohio state line to Erie Road, 2019 (estimated cost: $80 million). #3. Erie Road to Otter Creek Road, 2021 (estimated cost: $75 million). #4. Otter Creek Road to LaPlaisance Road, 2024 (estimated cost: $70 million). #5. LaPlaisance Road to Dixie Highway, TBD I-94 Kalamazoo County (estimated cost: $160 million). The I-94 freeway project in Kalamazoo County is sched- This segment includes reconfiguring the Elm Road uled for construction in Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 and will and Front Street interchanges in the immediate address poor pavement and bridge conditions on I-94 vicinity of the River Raisin Bridge. The bridge will from east of Lovers Lane to Sprinkle Road. The pavement not be replaced as part of the project but will have within this area is composite, consisting of asphalt that some minor capital preventive maintenance (CPM) has been placed over the original 1960s concrete. Ride work performed in 2019. MDOT staff will begin the quality of this road is poor due to the failed joints in the environmental review at the Elm Road and underlying concrete. The programmed work includes re- Front Street interchanges and identify impacts to the constructing and widening 2.5 miles of I-94, replacing five River Raisin, the surrounding floodplain and the bridges, reconstructing the Portage Road interchange, River Raisin Battlefield National Park. and constructing noise walls. Michigan Truck Tonnage

16 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

I-196 Grand Rapids Freeway reconstruction at the I-96/I-196 interchange in Grand Rapids involves replacing the bridge carrying westbound I-196 over eastbound I-96. While working through constructability, mobility/traffic control, and structure study portions of the development process for both projects, MDOT staff identified significant challenges with the proposed replacement of the westbound I-196 bridge over eastbound I-96 and associated adverse cost impacts. These challenges generated a conceptual look at bringing eastbound I-96 over westbound I-196 (essentially, flipping the overpass) to attain a much simpler bridge to both construct and maintain. This concept has proven beneficial when compared to other alignment changes required to achieve this while incorporating the original approved Environmental Assessment objectives related to construction and operational benefits. By flipping this bridge, MDOT can take full advantage of the cost and impact savings to the motoring public while constructing significant improvements to both facilities in 2018 and 2019, bringing future congestion • Constructing the eastbound I-96 bridge over west- relief sooner. This concept provides separation for both bound I-196, and raising the I-96 road profile to accom- eastbound I-196 and eastbound I-96 ramp movements modate this bridge and construction of the eastbound to M-37/M-44 (East Beltline Avenue), as well as providing I-96 roadway in the median to connect the existing two through-lanes until eastbound I-196 merges with eastbound I-96 roadway to the new alignment. eastbound I-96 without the interaction of the existing • Constructing the eastbound I-96 ramp to M-44/M-37 merging traffic accessing the East Beltline Avenue off (East Beltline Avenue), including the construction of ramp. Overall, this concept is making significant mobility bridge(s) over eastbound and westbound I-196. enhancements possible at a lower cost and impact given other regional projects currently in the Grand Region’s • Reconstructing westbound I-196 to provide three lanes program. It should be noted that these concepts will of traffic and lowering the road profile to construct the not cause the need for additional right of way and falls eastbound I-96 structure over westbound I-196. within the original footprint of construction originally • Reconstructing westbound I-96 near the gore with proposed and cleared environmentally. Construction of westbound I-196 due to changes in the road profile of this improvement includes the following: westbound I-196.

17 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

• Constructing the westbound I-96 inside lane/shoulder from the westbound I-196 split to the GRE Railroad Bus Rapid Transit and bridge for maintenance of traffic, and a future transition lane from westbound I-96 to westbound I-196. Regional Transit Planning Bus rapid transit (BRT) is express bus service with minimal • Reconstructing eastbound I-196 from the Maryland stops, enhanced by technology such as signal prioriti- Avenue bridge east to eastbound I-96. These two lanes zation and express ticketing options at accessible bus will be carried beyond the Maryland Avenue bridge and stations/stops with entry-level boarding platform. past the eastbound M-44/M-37 (East Beltline Avenue) ramp then transition to one lane prior to merging with The Rapid (the Grand Rapids-area transit agency) moves eastbound I-96 to separate through- and local traffic. into the fifth year of operations of their Silver Line, • Constructing a new M-44/M-37 (East Beltline Avenue) Michigan’s first BRT line, that connects Grand Rapids, ramp from eastbound I-196 to the existing ramp. Kentwood, and Wyoming, mainly servicing the Division Avenue corridor with 33 stations along 9.6 miles. Their • Reconstructing I-196 from Fuller Avenue east to I-96. second BRT line - the Laker Line, designed to enhance Included in this project are the following work items: the connection between Grand Valley State University’s - Reconstructing the eastbound and westbound I-196 Allendale campus and downtown Grand Rapids - received roadway from Fuller Avenue east to I-96. This portion a federal construction grant in FY 2017. of freeway reconstruction will begin at the terminus of the I-196 Fix project at Fuller Avenue Regional transit planning is an important element in the quest to fill service gaps and improve transit options. - Reconstructing the I-196 bridges over Plymouth Several urbanized areas are conducting studies to deter- Avenue to accommodate three lanes of traffic in each mine the best solutions for their regional transit needs. direction. - Reconstructing/widening of the I-196 bridges over In southeast Michigan, the Regional Transportation Plymouth Avenue. Authority of Southeast Michigan (RTA) is continuing its planning for the expansion of regional transit services in - Constructing a third lane on westbound I-196 from Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, and Washtenaw counties. The I-96 west to Fuller Avenue. RTA completed a regional transit master plan and corridor - Reconstructing and extending the on ramp accelera- study in 2016 and continues to work on implementing tion lane from Fuller Avenue to eastbound I-196. some elements, including regional funding initiatives - Widening the westbound I-196 bridge over and selecting service options for major corridors. The the Grand River. (Currently under construction.) Woodward Avenue study has already led to the selection of a locally preferred alternative (LPA) - BRT along the These projects will be coordinated, with most of the 27-mile corridor that will operate within the existing construction work and traffic impacts occurring in 2019 right of way, servicing 26 stations primarily on Woodward and 2020; some initial work for maintaining traffic and Avenue through 11 communities in Wayne and Oakland new construction in the median will begin in 2018. counties - and environmental work is continuing. Studies have been conducted for the Michigan and Gratiot Avenue corridors. The two studies evaluated alternatives for reliable, high-quality transit between Detroit and Mt. Clemens, along Gratiot Avenue to M-59, between Detroit and Ann Arbor, and access to the

18 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport. Service implementation will be dependent on securing federal, Airport Updates in Grand state and local funding. Rapids and Kalamazoo In Ann Arbor, an alternatives analysis is completed, The Gerald R. Ford International Airport (GRR) is a public-use looking at options to improve and enhance public transit commercial service airport located in Grand Rapids. In from northeast of town to south of town, including con- 2018 and 2019, the aircraft apron reconstruction project nections between the University of Michigan, downtown, will be performed in seven phases. Major features the medical center, the train station, and commercial will include: removal of the existing failing concrete areas. The proposed service is being referred to as “The pavement and replacement with 153,000 square yards of Connector” and is proposed to be one or two light rail/ new concrete for future airport development and aircraft streetcar lines. Evaluation of the project is in process and loadings; upgrades to the airport’s deicing material if it is to move forward the next step will be completion recovery system; upgraded storm water drainage system of FTA’s Project Development Process. and underground utilities to accommodate future airport development; and reducing energy usage by installing The Flint-area transit agency, the Mass Transportation all-new LED apron lighting. The area outlined in red Authority (MTA), has completed a study of the I-75 cor- below shows the areas that will be a part of this project. ridor between Bay City and Detroit, which included the This project includes $30.2 million in federal, state, and I-69 corridor from Port Huron to Lansing, to determine local funding. the transit needs and how to best address them today and into the future. Based on the recommendations, Flint The Kalamazoo/ MTA is working with the Suburban Mobility Authority for Battle Creek Regional Transport (SMART) to connect their services. International Airport (AZO) is a public-use See map on the following page that shows planned commercial service transit projects across the state. airport located in Portage. In 2019, pavement repairs of Runway 17/35 are planned. The last repair project for this runway took place in 1997. The project is estimated at $6 million in federal, state, and local funding.

19 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

PLANNED TRANSIT PROJECTS ACROSS THE STATE

20 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

I-75 Modernization in Oakland County The I-75 modernization project focuses on a 17.7-mile section from M-102 (8 Mile Road) to north of South Boulevard, which includes 11 interchanges and 16 road crossings through six communities within Oakland County. It carries daily traffic volumes ranging from 103,000 to 178,000 vehicles per day in the project area. Looking 3 miles to the east and west of I-75 within the project limits, this corridor supports 23,000 businesses and more than 339,000 employees. The project began construction in 2016 with a design-build (DB) segment from north of Coolidge Road to north of South Boulevard, and included modernizing the Square Lake Road interchange with standard right on and off ramps without impacting right of way. This modification improved operations and safety at the interchange and, along with the entire I-75 corridor specifically, reduces sideswipe and rear-end crashes. It improves the merge/weave traffic movements. This segment opened to traffic on Sept. 1, 2017. Since this project’s inception, MDOT has been considering various delivery alternatives to 2023. Reducing the construction time will significantly speed up construction and minimize stakeholder incon- reduce disruption to and negative economic impact on venience, which, under the prior financial plans, extended users and communities. It will also allow innovation, with construction through 2034. Through consideration of a construction and lifecycle efficiencies (e.g., economies variety of construction delivery methods, financial anal- of scale, better coordination of activities, and reduction ysis and consultation, MDOT has decided to advance the in mobilization costs), and in transferring long-term risks project using a two-segment approach, with both occur- and maintenance while taking advantage of the histori- ring concurrently (see adjacent map). Segment 2, extend- cally low cost of private financing. ing from Coolidge Road to 13 Mile Road, is planned to be delivered as a DB project, and then Segment 3, extending Construction of the remaining segments 2 and 3 will from 13 Mile Road to M-102 (8 Mile Road), is planned as a begin in late fall 2018 for segment 2 and possibly spring design, build, finance and maintain (DBFM) project. These 2019 or spring 2020 for segment 3, depending on the options will allow MDOT to realize the full economic proposed schedule from the designated developer team. benefits of the infrastructure modernization more than a The I-75 Oakland County projects section at the end decade sooner, wrapping up the major construction by of this document reflects these revised schedule changes.

21 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

An additional group of advanced bridges has been I-94 Modernization in identified and will be designed in 2018-2019 with Detroit construction beginning in 2020. Those bridges are East Grand Boulevard, Grand River Avenue, Frontenac Street, The I-94 modernization project involves reconstructing Burns Avenue, and two Conrail Railroad bridges over 6.7 miles of I-94 from east of the I-94/I-96 interchange I-94, along with Milwaukee Avenue over I-75. In response to east of Conner Avenue in Detroit. This section of I-94 to stakeholder comments, the preparation of a limited through midtown Detroit is on the books to be reconstruct- supplemental environmental impact statement has ed to improve safety, traffic flow, pavement and bridge begun to study proposed modifications to the project condition, freight mobility, and local access to the freeway. related to the service roads and bridges. In addition to reconstructing the I-94 roadway, the project currently includes rebuilding 67 bridge structures and six railroad overpasses. It also involves local access improvements, including linking the east/west I-94 services drives, and reconstructing and modernizing the ramps and interchanges, including the elimination of freeway left-lane exits and entrances. Work to improve several bridges over I-94 is currently underway. The new Van Dyke Avenue bridge at I-94 has been completed. In 2015, the Woodward Avenue overpass was completed and built to accommodate M-1 RAIL. In 2016, the new Trumbull Avenue bridge was completed. The design of the remaining eight priority bridges at Gratiot Avenue, Second Avenue, Cass Avenue, Chene Street, Brush Street, Mt. Elliott Street, Concord Avenue, Cadillac Avenue, and French Road is underway and will be constructed from 2018 to 2021. Construction of the eastern portion of the project on I-94 (Chene Street to Conner Street) is expected to begin in 2021.

22 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

implementation of this project is being achieved because Marquette Township of meaningful partnerships and financial participation US-41/M-28 Roundabouts from Marquette Township and local contributions. Additionally, the project secured grant funds through and Shared-Use Path the Federal Transportation Alternatives Program and Michigan Department of Natural Resources Natural Tunnel Project Resources Trust Fund. MDOT, in partnership with Marquette Charter Township, will construct a shared-use pathway tunnel under US-41 and M-28, and a shared-use pathway from the Iron Ore Heritage Trail to County Road 492. This project is the first phase toward connecting to a previously funded Safe Routes to School project and is part of a larger plan to connect the 48-mile-long regional Iron Ore Heritage Trail to residential neighborhoods and the Noquemanon Trail. This project will be paired with an MDOT road reconstruction project in 2019; that project includes constructing two new roundabouts, further enhancing safety and access to the commercial business along this corridor. The tunnel will improve safety by providing pedestrians, bicyclists and snowmobilers with a separated grade crossing of this busy commercial corridor and the rapidly developing retail and entertainment district. The successful

23 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security recently Project Identified by completed an analysis of the impacts resulting from a the 21st Century six-month unscheduled closure of the Poe Lock. The findings are staggering: there would be a complete Infrastructure Report shutdown of Great Lakes steel production; 75 percent of U.S. integrated steel production would cease; 80 percent Soo Locks of iron ore mining would cease; and nearly 100 percent The Soo Locks are a critical part of the freight transpor- of North American appliance, auto, construction equip- tation infrastructure of the Great Lakes region. Located ment, farm equipment, mining equipment, and railcar on the St. Mary’s River between Michigan and Ontario, manufacturing would cease. There would be the Soo Locks are owned and operated by the U.S. Army 11 million job losses in the U.S., plus more in Canada Corps of Engineers and provide a vital link between Lake and Mexico, and a $1.1 trillion decrease in GDP Superior, the other Great Lakes, and the rest of the world. (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, October 2015). Nearly 4,000 American, Canadian, and foreign flag vessels This would likely result in widespread bankruptcies pass through the locks annually, carrying more than and a recession. 65 million tons of iron ore, stone, low-sulfur coal, grain, Today, the construction of the new lock has been and cement, and other cargoes. Approximately 80 percent of remains stalled. In 1986, Congress authorized construc- the raw materials used by U.S. steel manufacturers, as well tion of a second large lock equal in size to the Poe Lock in as much of the low-sulfur coal used by regional electric order to provide the necessary capacity and redundancy. utilities, pass through the locks. The 50-year-old Poe Lock The new lock will be constructed on the site of two is the only lock capable of accommodating the largest obsolete locks built during World War I that are now Great Lakes vessels that carry 86 percent of all cargo permanently closed. Except for some limited preliminary passing through the locks and account for 3.2 percent of construction in 2009-2010, the project has stalled due to the total U.S. GDP (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, lack of federal funding. A remaining obstacle is a low ben- October 2015; Kowall 2016). This critical reliance on a efit-to-cost estimate for the project, the result of flawed 50-year-old single lock is unwise and unsustainable. assumptions in the original methodology. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is currently conducting an economic reevaluation based on more accurate assumptions. The study is scheduled to be released in June 2018 and is expected to produce a significantly higher benefit-to-cost ratio, which will allow the chief of engineers to formally advance the project to Congress for funding. The 21st Century Transportation Commission Report called upon the Michigan Legislature to pass a resolution to urge the federal government to expedite completion of the Economic Reevaluation Report currently being prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and to provide the necessary funding to construct the new lock. The current estimated investment needed is approximately $922 million of federal funding invested over several years.

24 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

21st Century Pilot Update One of the primary recommendations of the 21st Century Infrastructure Commission was the development of a statewide comprehensive database of infrastructure assets and their condition. In 2017, Gov. Snyder’s administration selected Prosperity Regions 10 and 4 to lead pilot projects to identify the approach and data components for such a data base. Region 10 in southeast Michigan provides the opportunity to implement the pilot in a densely populated urban environment with much older infrastructure, while Region 4 on the west side of Michigan is a sprawling mix of urban areas and very rural areas that present different infrastructure data challenges. The pilot studies are complete and local participation in both areas was tremendous. The pilot report that was generated through Gov. Snyder’s office was issued in late April and it will provide the blueprint for statewide rollout and implementation. Legislation in support of the 21st Century effort has been drafted, creating the Michigan Infrastructure Council (MIC), Water Asset Management Council (WAMC), and modifications to existing Transportation Asset Management Council (TAMC) legislation. The 21st Century Infrastructure initiative will expand asset management practices to various assets within the road right of way, improve coordination between asset owners, and provide the roadmap for infrastructure management and investing to meet the long-term needs for the state of Michigan.

25 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Public Comments

26 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Public Comments

27 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

are often many years in the making, so it is important to Five-Year engage stakeholders early so that public participation can help shape mutually desired outcomes. Transportation The Five-Year Transportation Program creates a contin- uous, interactive dialogue with the users of the state Program Process transportation system to anchor MDOT’s project develop- The Five-Year Transportation Program is an essential part ment and delivery systems. MDOT’s seven region offices, of the governor’s plan for economic growth for Michigan, 22 Transportation Service Centers (TSC) and statewide and includes planned investments for highways, bridges, planning staff work throughout the year to share public transit, rail, aviation, marine, and nonmotorized project lists with local agencies, stakeholders and the public. Information is presented at rural elected officials transportation. Investments in all of these transportation meetings, TSC transportation summits, rural task force modes provide important jobs to the Michigan economy, meetings, region prosperity meetings, and meetings with accessibility to urban and rural development, improved legislators. In addition to formal presentations, MDOT safety and efficiency of the transportation network, and staff members informally discuss individual projects enhanced quality of life for Michigan citizens. with economic development and tourism agencies, the The highway portion is a rolling program; each year, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), the first year is implemented, a new fifth year is added, and Michigan Economic Development Corp. (MEDC), rural program/project adjustments are made to the other planning agencies, metropolitan planning organizations years. This document only pertains to that portion of the (MPOs), road commissions, local officials, tribal govern- programs that MDOT delivers. It does not account for ments, businesses, local nonprofit groups, and the public. programs delivered locally with state and federal funds MDOT staff also field questions from local governments that are directly controlled by local agencies, such as and the public regarding upcoming projects in the future, transit agencies or county road commissions. partnering on projects with other stakeholders, or coordinating when the project will be delivered. The Highway Program development process is a yearlong, multi-stage process as shown in the following flowchart. Public participation in MDOT’s Five-Year Transportation Program feeds into the State Transportation Improvement MDOT strives to continually involve the public and stake- Program (STIP). The Five-Year Transportation Program holders in development of its programs and projects. The serves as an opportunity for the public to be notified Five-Year Transportation Program process is an important and provide local input to the upcoming STIP. The road opportunity to implement the vision that citizens and and bridge projects proposed in the Five-Year Program businesses have for Michigan. Transportation projects are incorporated into MDOT’s STIP. Michigan is required to complete this planning process to receive federal Develop Develop Issue Develop Select Scope and Estimate Revenue Investment Call Condition Candidate Candidate transportation funding. Estimates Strategies Letter Strategies Projects Projects Select Final Follow MDOT on Projects State Transportation Plan Public/Stakeholder Input and Commission Policies Includes Rural Task Forces and MPO Partners Facebook and Twitter or Submit contact your local MDOT Proposed State Leadership region office to be best Submit to Draft Program Transportation Approval of the State Transportation Commission Call for informed about upcoming Legislature Program Approval Projects projects in your area.

28 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Revenue Assumptions and Investment Strategies Overview Enhancing economic development by preserving and maintaining a safe transportation system remains MDOT’s highest priority. This Five-Year Transportation Program invests about $11.3 billion in MDOT’s transportation system. This includes investments in the Highway, Aviation, Bus, Rail, and Marine programs. A total of $8.7 billion (including routine maintenance) will be invested in the 2019-2023 Highway Program. Over these five years, $508 million will be invested in the Aviation Program and $2.1 billion will be invested in Bus, Rail, and Marine/Port programs (see the following pie chart). The Highway Program focuses on system preservation Total - $11.3 Billion through the repair, operation and maintenance of Michi- gan’s roads and bridges. The majority of the Multi-Modal Program concentrates on system preservation as well. Aviation Bus, Marine, Rail Investments in Michigan’s transportation system focus on a comprehensive safety program and increased emphasis $508 M $2.18 B on mobility, reliability and expanded work zone safety efforts. The Five-Year Transportation Program documents that MDOT’s investments in the state transportation system directly benefit Michigan citizens by providing them with expanded options, mobility, and access.

Highway $8.7 B

29 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

21st Century Act, or MAP-21. MAP-21 directed agencies Highway Program Revenue to think more about freight by interacting more closely with stakeholders and engaging in specific freight plan- Assumptions ning efforts. MAP-21 also transformed federal highway Federal Funding and transit programs through the establishment of a performance-based approach to decision-making. The FY 2018 will mark the third year of the five-year surface FAST Act supports this initiative by funding efforts to transportation bill known as the Fixing America’s Surface collect and manage data for performance analysis, and to Transportation Act, or the FAST Act. The legislation was improve capacity of transportation agencies to better link signed into law in December 2015 and authorized federal investments with outcomes. transportation programs and funding for the period cov- ering the 2016-2020 fiscal years. The FAST Act authorizes Reliance on non-transportation revenue to support the investment of $305 billion in federal funding in the investments in surface transportation is continued in the nation’s surface transportation system over its duration. FAST Act. It transfers $70 billion from the federal General Fund into the federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF) to ensure The FAST Act provided a modest increase in overall that all the investments in highways and transit during funding for the federal highway program. The legislation the next five fiscal years are fully paid for. This brings the also created two new freight programs to better target total amount of non-transportation revenue that has investments to projects that promote efficient movement supported investments from the HTF during the past of freight. Funding for these two new programs essential- seven years to nearly $145 billion. ly account for most of the increased funding provided by the FAST Act. Beyond the new freight programs, funding The FY 2019-2023 federal-aid revenue estimate is based for the remaining federal highway programs grew by on FAST Act estimates of federal funding available for roughly the expected rate of inflation. Michigan. Federal funding is assumed to grow about 2 percent per year for the entire Five-Year Program time The new freight programs in the FAST Act build on the period. It is projected that $4.3 billion in federal funding reforms included in the previous surface transportation will be made available to the Highway Program for this authorization bill, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the Five-Year Transportation Program.

30 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

State Funding used by MDOT. The funds collected from state fuel tax On Jan. 1, 2017, the gasoline tax increased from 18.7 to and vehicle registration revenues are deposited into the 26.3 cents per gallon, and the diesel fuel tax increased MTF, the distribution fund for transportation revenues. from 15.0 to 26.3 cents per gallon. The motor fuel tax was MDOT receives approximately 39 percent of this fund also applied to natural gas (CNG) as well. Fuel tax rates (known as the State Trunkline Fund, or STF), county road will be tied to inflation beginning in 2022 to remedy the commissions receive 39 percent, and cities receive about decline in purchasing power of the fuel tax. Registration 22 percent. fees for most cars and trucks were also increased by 20 percent on Jan. 1, 2017. New electric car fees of $100 per Highway Program Investment Strategy year, and $30 for plug-in hybrid cars, attempt to equalize The State Transportation Commission (STC) establishes road-user fees for vehicles that use little or no taxed policies, goals, and objectives that provide the basis for fuel. The user-fee increases are estimated to generate highway funding allocation decisions. MDOT developed an additional $600 million per year for the Michigan an investment strategy process to accomplish the Transportation Fund. Starting Oct. 1, 2018, income tax effective use of financial resources on the state trunkline revenues will be appropriated for roads, increasing from Highway Program. The process allocates an investment $150 million to $325 million in FY 2020 to $600 million amount to various program categories (bridge, road, in 2021. An estimated $600 million in income taxes are safety, etc.) annually, based on program improvement forecasted to continue to be distributed into the MTF strategy, goals, and statewide priorities. It sets the level of continuing in FY 2022 and 2023. The income tax revenues funding to achieve highway improvement priorities and will be distributed to roads agencies only, under the usual provides a tool to constrain the overall statewide program Act 51 formula. against available revenues. The state revenue estimate is based on MDOT’s share of MDOT has a pavement preservation formula that allo- the Michigan Transportation Fund (MTF), as estimated by cates funding to its seven regions. The formula weighs consensus with the Department of Treasury, Economic four overall factors: pavement condition, eligible lane and Revenue Forecasting Division. Future state revenue is miles for pavement reconstruction and repair work, usage forecast using a long-range forecasting model managed (average daily traffic volumes), and regional cost. These by MDOT’s Statewide Transportation Planning Division. factors form the basis for how pavement preservation It is estimated that $4 billion in state revenue will be funds are distributed to each region. The formula is available for MDOT’s Highway Program. Private contractor updated annually with current pavement condition, funding for the I-75 Oakland County Segment 3 DBFM traffic, cost and eligible lane miles. contract will be utilized to offset project costs through the construction of the Segment 3 project. Bridge funding is distributed to MDOT regions using the bridge preservation allocation formula. It uses the deck Funding Distribution area of bridges in each National Bridge Inventory condition to allocate funds to each MDOT region. Funding is Public Act 51 of 1951 (Act 51) mandates how transpor- split into investment targets for replacement, repair, and tation funds are distributed and spent between MDOT preventive maintenance work. and local entities. The intent of Act 51 in regard to federal highway aid is to distribute approximately 25 The table on the following page provides the Highway percent of federal aid to local jurisdictions for use on Program investments strategy for FY 2019-2023. federal-aid-eligible local roads. The remainder is to be

31 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Highway Investment Program FY 2019-2023

FY 2019-2023 Annual Average Five-Year Total (millions) (millions) REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS AND BRIDGES REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS Rehabilitation and Reconstruction $550 $2,747 Capital Preventive Maintenance $119 $596 Freeway Lighting $0.2 $1 Freeway Resurfacing Program $20 $100 Non-Freeway Resurfacing Program $47 $235 Trunkline Modernization* $238 $1,192 TOTAL - Repair and Rebuild Roads $974 $4,871

REPAIR AND REBUILD BRIDGES Bridge Replacement $65 $325 Bridge Preservation $73 $363 Big Bridges $26 $131 Special Needs $22 $110 Culverts-Capital $2 $10 Blue Water Bridge-Appropriated Capital Outlay Projects $3 $15 TOTAL - Bridges $191 $954

ROUTINE MAINTENANCE $342 $1,712

TOTAL - REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS AND BRIDGES $1,507 $7,537

SAFETY AND SYSTEM OPERATIONS $168 $842 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES $10 $48 ROADSIDE FACILITIES $12 $60 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT $9 $45 NON-FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS $37 $183

TOTAL - FIVE-YEAR TRUNKLINE PROGRAM $1,743 $8,715

*Includes $575 million over five years for I-75 Oakland County Segment 3 DBFM project

32 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

The FY 2019-2023 Five-Year Transportation Program estimates that investments for the Highway Program total approximately $8.7 billion. This total reflects investments for pre-construction (scoping, design, environmental clearance and right-of-way acquisition) and construction activities. This Highway Program investment will provide Michigan travelers with approximately 473 miles of improved roads per year over the next five years, and repairs to 119 bridges per year. MDOT also will manage its road system by extending the life of approximately 1,050 miles of pavement each year through the capital preventive maintenance (CPM) program and 400 miles of non- freeway resurfacing. The Trunkline Modernization category includes design and construction for portions of the I-75 corridor in Oakland County, and design and P I FY 2019-2023 construction for portions of the I-94 corridor in Detroit. $2,000 This document includes $1,817 $1,829 $1,800 $1,75 $1,7 a project listing by region $1,3 for additional projects in $1,00 major work categories. These projects also can be viewed $1,400 on a state map and regional $1,200 $1,47 $1,48 maps on the MDOT website $1,412 $1,331 at http://mdotnetpublic. $1,000 $1,297 state.mi.us/fyp/. $800 The following chart illus- $ $00 trates the annual Highway Program investments by $400 program categories over the $341 $343 $344 $345 five-year time frame. The $200 $339 graphic shows the year-by- $0 year planned investments. 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

33 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Multi-Modal Programs MDOT’s FY 2019-2023 Multi-Modal Program includes two main areas: public transportation and aviation. Public transportation programs are administered by two offices. The Office of Passenger Transportation (OPT) administers the Bus and Marine programs while the Office of Rail (OoR) administers the Rail and Port programs. The Office of Aeronautics administers the Aviation Program. These offices provide capital and operating assistance, technical support, and safety oversight. The Multi-Modal Program focuses largely on continued safe and secure operation of the existing transportation system through routine maintenance, capital replacement/repair, and preservation of existing service levels. MDOT’s approach to the Multi-Modal Program differs significantly from the Highway Program. Much of the infrastructure is owned, managed, and operated by entities other than MDOT, and the state and federal funding that MDOT is responsible for represents only a portion of the overall investments in these modes. However, MDOT’s recent acquisition and upgrade of the rail corridor between Dearborn and Kalamazoo has changed the landscape. Investing nearly $400 million in federal grant dollars, MDOT purchased this corridor from Norfolk Southern Railway and undertook substantial improvements designed to enable accelerated passenger train speeds. As a condition of the federal grant, MDOT is now responsible for funding the annual maintenance of the corridor, as well as those capital improvements necessary to keep the line in a state of good repair. The multi-modal portion of the five-year program con- tains overview information where the modes or programs have similar conditions, and mode-specific information when appropriate due to unique considerations or funding issues.

34 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Passenger Transportation Public Transportation (Bus and Marine) Program Development Revenue Assumptions The Bus and Marine programs are administered by MDOT’s Office of Passenger Transportation and cover (Bus, Rail, Marine, Port) local transit (bus), marine, and intercity bus - the largest Public Transportation Revenue Issues of these being local transit. In many ways, development of a five-year program for these programs is not suitable, The Public Transportation Program receives most of its at least not in the same way as is suitable for MDOT’s road state funding through the Comprehensive Transportation and bridge program, primarily because the clear majority Fund (CTF). Approximately 73 percent of CTF revenues of local transit projects are selected at the local level, not are from the MTF, which is funded by the state motor fuel by MDOT, and are determined annually. In addition, the tax and vehicle registration fees. The MTF transfer to the CTF is subject to an annual appropriations process, the CTF has increased due to the changes in fuel taxes and results of which determine the funding available for each registration fees from the recent transportation revenue of the programs. package. However, the CTF will not benefit from any of the General Fund revenues that will be appropriated for Because the CTF is subject to an annual appropriations roads beginning in FY 2019. In part, additional MTF funds process, it is rare that MDOT makes a multi-year funding will support a new MDOT local crossing surface program. commitment from the CTF, other than continuation of the The CTF also receives revenues from auto-related sales tax annual programs mandated in Act 51. Therefore, what is revenue, which varies from year to year. The distribution presented in this document is MDOT’s annual program of the MTF to the CTF and the sales tax contributions to for FY 2019, the estimated funding that may be available the CTF are called for in state law but neither is constitu- for the remaining years of the program, and a description tionally protected. In past years, the Public Transportation of the factors anticipated to influence both the funding Program has also been appropriated General Fund dollars availability and the annual decisions that will be made since CTF revenue was insufficient to match federal funds over the life of this program. and support a continuation level of services. In FY 2018, $8 million was appropriated from the General Fund for the $8 Million Michigan Mobility Challenge to utilize technology and innovative service models to solve mobility gaps for seniors, persons with disabilities and veterans. For CTF revenues, this five-year program is based on the FY 2019 CTF appropriation and revenue estimates for FY 2020 through FY 2023. Based on current FY 2019 revenue estimates, CTF funding available for appropriation in FY 2019 is approximately $17 million more, or 5.15 percent, than the FY 2018 appropriation. This increase is due to a small inflationary increase plus appropriation of the estimated unreserved CTF FY 2018 fund balance. Even with the additional revenue generated by the recent transportation revenue package, revenues may not be sufficient to meet the program needs over this five-year period.

35 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Local Transit Revenue Assumptions specialized transit fleets. Urban agencies throughout the The programs in this category provide funding for oper- state will likely also compete for these funds. ating and capital support, training, and special projects to It is important to note that more than 80 percent of FTA local bus operators that service the general public. Assis- formula funds for local bus systems go directly to transit tance also is provided to support transportation services agencies and are not reflected in MDOT’s program. Also, focused on the needs of senior citizens and persons with the federal discretionary funds that will be sought by disabilities, as well as the transportation-to-work needs urban transit agencies under the Buses and Bus Facilities of low income individuals. A total of 119 transit providers program, as well as the grants that The Rapid and the (81 local agencies and 38 specialized services agencies) Regional Transit Authority (RTA) will seek to implement in all 83 Michigan counties are provided support under their regional transit improvements, will not flow through these programs. MDOT. However, under Act 51 all of these federal funds The FAST Act continues all the federal transit formula are matched by MDOT using the CTF appropriated for programs as outlined in MAP-21, with increases that are that purpose. Therefore, when CTF dollars are not avail- roughly inflationary. It also maintains the same basic able to match federal funds, the impact is largely on local structure of these programs in terms of which programs/ programs, not MDOT programs, which means impacts on funds are apportioned to the state to deliver to MDOT’s the transit infrastructure and on transit providers’ ability sub-recipients and that are apportioned directly to to access federal funds is not detailed in this five-year urbanized areas. New program requirements included program document. Given the discretionary nature of in MAP-21 pertaining to transit asset management and some of these funds, it is not yet known if the CTF dollars transit safety planning and related performance measures available will be sufficient to match all available federal remain in place. MDOT and urban transit agencies are transit aid. developing Transit Asset Management Plans. The safety Also part of local transit is the MichiVan Program. MDOT requirements have yet to come into effect because contracts with private service providers to help organize Federal Transit Agency (FTA) rulemaking is still in process. and sustain vanpools as a commuting alternative. Once they become effective they may influence local and Federal funds for MichiVan come from FHWA’s Congestion state investment decisions. Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program and are The FAST Act includes a new competitive program (Buses programmed under the Highway Program. A small and Bus Facilities) that allows the FTA to make competi- amount of CTF also is used each year for MichiVan. tive grants to states and transit agencies for bus and bus facility capital projects. The predecessor to this program Marine Revenue Assumptions - under prior authorizations - was an important source The FHWA Ferryboat Formula Program continues in the of capital funding, via both congressional earmarks and FAST Act. While the FHWA formula program provides a FTA competitive grants, for many urban and rural transit guaranteed annual allotment to eligible ferry systems agencies in Michigan. When the discretionary portion in Michigan, the annual funding level for each system is of the bus and bus facilities program was eliminated small and inadequate for major capital improvements, in MAP-21, it resulted in a reduction of federal funding such as replacing ferry vessels, expanding terminals or to agencies in Michigan and projected declines in the docks, or upgrades. Each ferry system that receives a condition of the state’s bus infrastructure, even as na- federal allocation on this program will determine how to tionwide transit funding amounts remained level. MDOT use the funds, and MDOT will issue grants accordingly. will submit annual applications to the FTA in hopes of The federal funds that will come to Michigan under the getting funding to improve the condition of the rural and

36 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

FHWA program are not shown in the Bus and Marine Rail Revenue Assumptions programs but are included in the highway portion of this MDOT’s rail programs are funded by dedicated feder- five-year program. al-aid, MTF, and CTF dollars. Dedicated federal-aid and MTF funds support motorist safety at railroad crossings Intercity Bus Revenue Assumptions on local roads. Under the FAST Act, a gradual increase in The Intercity Bus Program provides both operating and dedicated federal aid will continue through FY 2020. The capital assistance for the intercity network in the state, FAST Act also includes a $4.5 million one-time infusion of with a goal to allow residents access to the national federal funds for railroad crossing safety that is planned transportation network. The program is supported with to be invested in FY 2019. CTF funds are the only ongoing a combination of federal and state funds, with the excep- source of revenue for MDOT’s passenger and freight rail tion of the Terminal Development Program, which pays efforts. There is a one-time $6.1 million increase in CTF for small projects using only state funds. Under the FAST funding in FY 2019 for these activities. CTF funding is Act, the federal funds available for intercity bus should otherwise projected to return to FY 2018 levels and re- remain at about the same level for the duration of this main constant through FY 2023. MDOT will also continue five-year program. MDOT anticipates state funds to be ad- to compete for federal funding to assist with rail capital equate to support the continuation of the current level of enhancements, as appropriate. Federal funding generally service. The Intercity Bus program will utilize the federal requires a minimum of 20 percent matching funds, which In-Kind Match Program when the next contract is bid in may require additional state revenues to take advantage 2018. The federal In-Kind Match Program allows states to of these opportunities. use the value of connecting unsubsidized intercity bus NOTE: STF dollars and corresponding dedicated federal service as in-kind match for a route subsidized by the FTA funds support a trunkline crossing program that also is 5311 (f) program. Using this program will allow MDOT invested as a part of the Rail Program, but those funds are to stretch both state and federal funds without putting accounted for as a part of the Highway Program. stress on the state funding.

Rail (Passenger and Freight) and Port Revenue Assumptions Port Program Development The pass-through assistance provided to the Detroit-Wayne County Port Authority is nearly $420,000 The Office of Rail administers MDOT’s Rail and Port for FY 2019 and is expected to continue at that level Programs. Like OPT’s Program, the Rail and Port Program through FY 2023. is primarily supported with an annual CTF appropriation. This five-year program was developed based on the FY 2019 annual program and the estimated funding for the remaining years of the five-year program. The Office of Rail scales its efforts annually to fit available funding. Most of the Office of Rail’s ongoing expenditures will be for intercity passenger rail service, with costs that are calculated annually. Additional investments will be made through other annual programs that are either applica- tion-based or identified through an annual prioritization process.

37 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

In FY 2019, the Airport Safety and Protection Plan bond Aviation Revenue debt will begin to decrease and make a small amount of Assumptions additional funds available for the Airport Capital Program. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Modernization In summary, aviation program revenue assumptions are: and Reform Act, which was to expire in September 2015, • Federal Revenues was extended by Congress until the end of September 2018. It continued to fund the Airport Capital - Uncertain through FY 2023 but estimated to remain Improvement Program (ACIP) at $3.4 billion yearly. It is at present levels. expected that Congress will pass a new act that will con- - Continued formula apportionments, congressional tinue the ACIP, as well as other aviation-related programs earmarks, and discretionary grants. administered by FAA. Funding levels are uncertain, but - In partnership with locals, compete for federal for this five-year plan it is assumed that ACIP funding will discretionary funds. remain essentially the same at $3.4 billion annually. One change in the extension was the addition of $1 billion - Increase in federal funds for three years for for the Airport Improvement Program to be used over rural airports FY 2018 through FY 2020. The purpose of the extra • State Revenues funding is for small rural airports and will require no local or state matching funds. The funding is strictly FAA discre- - Committed to match all available federal funding. tionary funds, although the state will provide suggestions - Excise fuel tax revenue may be recovering to and information as requested. It is anticipated that this near previous level. program could provide Michigan airports an additional - Decrease in bond debt service. $20 million over the three years. - Sales tax revenue grows to replace previous The current federal administration has proposed and may General Fund appropriations. introduce additional infrastructure funding legislation for the next two years. While the amount that may come to airports is unknown at this time, an additional $5 million per year will be added to the anticipated federal funding levels. While state aviation revenue has recently and may continue to increase, inflation places pressure on local communities for maintaining the airport infrastructure. Michigan’s aviation fuel excise tax is the primary funding source for the State Aeronautics Fund (SAF). Additional funding from the federal government will strain the Aeronautics budget for matching funds. The Air Service Program that supports the Governor’s Dashboard is funded in FY 2019 at $250,000 per year. The program is included in this five-year plan for the final four years in anticipation of increased revenues.

38 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Public Transportation Local Transit Investment Strategy State funds are combined with federal and local dollars, Investment Strategies including farebox revenue and local millages, to support operation and maintenance of the local transit network. MDOT’s Public Transportation Program includes local The state’s annual investment strategy for the Local transit, intercity bus, marine passenger, the MichiVan Transit Program is largely determined by detailed require- vanpool program, port, freight rail, and passenger rail. ments set forth in Act 51 of 1951 for annual distribution/ The program provides for a combination of capital and use of CTF revenues and the eligible uses of federal operating assistance, technical support, safety oversight, formula apportionments and competitive grant awards. and compliance monitoring for each of the modes. Last year’s Five-Year Transportation Program represented the The budgeted funds for FY 2019 are anticipated to beginning of a recovery process for a program that had maintain current funding levels in state Local Bus been steadily reduced over several years. The recently Operating (LBO) assistance. The CTF available to match enacted revenue package provided additional funding for federal aid will be sufficient to leverage all anticipated FY 2017 and future years to help support this program. federal operating and capital formula allocations but may not be sufficient to match all competitive awards. A high The total Public Transportation Program for FY 2019 is level of success in receiving new federal discretionary estimated to be $419.4 million, of which $321.5 million is funds could put a strain on the CTF. CTF and $97.9 million is a combination of federal, other state, local, and private funds. The $97.9 million includes The MichiVan Program will be maintained with state, $13.5 million for the local grade crossing program. The federal, and local funds. Demand for new vanpools CTF revenue numbers for FY 2019 and FY 2020 are from continues to increase as fuel prices fluctuate. the Michigan Department of Treasury Office of Revenue and Tax Analysis’s (ORTA) Jan. 19, 2018, estimates. After MDOT’s local transit investments will focus on: FY 2019, CTF revenues are only expected to grow slightly • Preservation of existing services in all 83 counties via based on inflation. Based on the proposed FY 2019 operating assistance to local transit, intercity bus, and program, ORTA’s estimates for FY 2020, and MDOT esti- public marine service providers. mates for FY 2021 through FY 2023, the five-year program estimate is $2.1 billion. • Preservation and maintenance of the existing infrastructure (largely locally owned) via state investment and The investment of CTF revenues in the public transporta- match to federal funds for routine vehicle replacement. tion system is determined by the detailed requirements • Support of local capital strategies established by currently set forth in Act 51, as well as the annual individual transit agencies via matching federal capital appropriations process. Act 51 requires the majority of grants for infrastructure replacement and repairs, and, in CTF revenues to be used for local transit. Based on the very limited situations, some minor capacity expansion. current structure of Act 51 and the requested revenue, the investments called for in this five-year program are Based on this model, there is limited CTF anticipated focused heavily on the preservation of the existing public in the program for urban growth for projects, such as transportation system. the North-South Commuter Rail (Howell-Ann Arbor) or expanded transit in the RTA service area.

39 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Intercity Bus Investment Strategy modal/intercity terminals and infrastructure so the public The Intercity Bus Program provides CTF and federal can safely and conveniently access intercity services. Section 5311(f) program funds for the procurement of The Detroit intercity bus facility is nearing the end of its motor coaches and select intercity bus routes within useful life, so more frequent/thorough inspections are Michigan. In addition, the program is responsible for planned to stay on top of requirements to maintain the maintaining four transportation centers throughout the aging infrastructure until plans for a new facility can be state. MDOT will continue to use state and federal funds finalized over the course of this five-year program. Failure to contract with intercity bus carriers to provide route of any major mechanical or structural components could service that would not otherwise exist (i.e., service that require allocating additional funds and speeding up the would not be provided by the carrier absent a state subsi- facility replacement schedule. The desire is to incorporate dy) and are essential to national connectivity. Every three intercity bus services into a multi-modal service center. years, MDOT bids out the five routes in northern Michigan No other potential major construction projects are that private carriers have abandoned due to lack of foreseen during this five-year program. profitability. Vehicles used on these routes and routes in the southern portion of the state deemed essential to Marine Passenger Investment Strategy national connectivity also are funded with a combination The four state-subsidized marine passenger systems will of state and federal funds. Based on the FAST Act and continue to receive operating assistance under the Local anticipated CTF funding levels, the current level of service Bus Operating Assistance Program called for in Act 51 will be maintained for the life of this five-year program. to preserve the service they provide. Any state marine MDOT implemented its first In-Kind Match Program capital funds available over the life of this program will be route that started Aug. 1, 2017. This demonstration route used for routine infrastructure maintenance and improve- provides two daily round trips between Detroit and ments to ensure the integrity of the system. However, Port Huron, providing meaningful connections for both with the small amount of state and federal capital bus and train passengers. The federal In-Kind Match funding available for the Marine Passenger Program, Program allows states to use the value of connecting deterioration of the locally owned infrastructure over the unsubsidized intercity bus service as in-kind match for a life of this five-year program is likely, which will make it route subsidized by the FTA 5311(f) program. MDOT has difficult to preserve the system and likely impossible to been in a partnership with the Wisconsin Department of replace the aging ferryboats. Transportation (WisDOT) to co-fund two routes that benefit both states and provide meaningful connections Rail Investment Strategy to the national network. However, beginning in MDOT’s rail investments will include state and federal FY 2018, WisDOT will begin using the federal In-Kind funds to preserve and enhance Michigan’s passenger and Match Program to fully fund one of these routes using freight rail systems, ensure railroad crossing safety and Wisconsin’s federal 5311(f) funding and credits from a promote economic development. privately funded route in Wisconsin. This will free up the During this five-year program, the bulk of MDOT’s invest- CTF funds to be used for other in-state projects. They ment in rail will be to preserve and enhance Michigan’s hope to eventually fund the second route with in-kind intercity passenger rail services, as mandated by federal match, but it may not be during this five-year program. statute or existing contractual arrangements. Under the MDOT also will continue to use state and/or federal funds Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 to enhance the intercity passenger infrastructure. The (PRIIA), MDOT is responsible for providing operating Terminal Development Program is used to maintain inter- support for the three Michigan Amtrak routes that serve

40 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

22 station communities. These operating expenditures • Safety projects to reduce motorist risk at crossings will have decreased in the past two fiscal years, therefore include warning device enhancements and crossing MDOT expects to be able to address deferred capital elimination projects on roads under local jurisdiction. and maintenance work on its 665 miles of state-owned Approximately $6 million is expected to be invested in corridors over the Five-Year Program. crossing safety on local roads in FY 2019. Investments on the state-owned corridor between • A special effort to eliminate railroad crossings by Kalamazoo and Dearborn will focus on achieving and relocating track on local roads and state trunklines maintaining passenger train speeds of up to 110 mph. In will be undertaken in FY 2019 as a result of a one-time FY 2019, MDOT plans to invest $61.6 million in operating infusion of $4.5 million provided under the FAST Act. support and on the state-owned Kalamazoo-Dearborn • Approximately $3 million will be invested in FY 2019 corridor. In addition, this five-year program will include through a competitive program for railroad crossing participation in a multi-state grant that will replace train surface improvements on roads on the local system. equipment on all three Michigan routes. MDOT has • Projects on the state trunkline system designed both benefitted from significant federal grants in recent years to improve crossing surfaces and upgrade warning and will continue to compete for additional funding, devices (accounted for under the Highway Program). as appropriate, to continue its efforts to enhance this corridor and the overall passenger experience. MDOT also plans to make $2 million in loans available for rail infrastructure preservation through the Michigan Rail Remaining CTF dollars will be strategically invested in Loan Assistance Program in a FY 2019 call for projects. freight economic development loans and state-owned Funding is available through a revolving fund started with freight line preservation, while dedicated MTF and federal prior CTF appropriations. dollars will be invested in safety enhancements at railroad crossings. Specific projects will be identified annually Beyond funding, MDOT will continue to work with based on available funding, but in FY 2019 generally will stakeholders to plan and support other passenger rail include: projects, including planning for new stations in Ann Arbor and Port Huron. In addition, MDOT will provide technical • Preservation of freight service on state-owned corridors assistance to existing and proposed commuter and light through capital repairs, including track and bridge rail efforts. MDOT will also be assessing Amtrak stations work. In addition to the investments on the state- for compliance with requirements of the Americans with owned corridor between Kalamazoo and Dearborn, Disabilities Act (ADA). MDOT plans to invest approximately $7 million in track and bridge work on its other state-owned corridors in Port Authority Investment FY 2019. For each of the next five years, MDOT anticipates provid- • Low-interest loans through the Freight Economic ing approximately $420,000 in legislatively appropriated Development Program to assist new or expanding funding to the Detroit-Wayne County Port Authority to businesses with access to the rail system. MDOT assist with operating costs and marketing activities. anticipates providing approximately $3 million through this program in FY 2019, but actual investment could vary widely based on applications received.

41 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

The study further estimated that the jobs created by Aviation Investment aviation activities numbers 183,597. These figures are Strategy conservative, as they are from 114 of the largest airports in Michigan, leaving out contributions from the 112 Airport Capital Improvement Program (ACIP) smallest airports. The ACIP potentially provides funding for approximately Priorities are a significant part of the funding decisions 226 public use airports for capital improvement projects that support the organizational mission and represent the and pavement maintenance. Of the 226 eligible airports, overall vision driving the airport infrastructure investment 90 receive federal entitlement funding as part of the strategy. These priorities coincide with the direction set National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems. Most of forth by the 21st Century Infrastructure Commission. Michigan’s public use airports that receive federal While constrained, these include: entitlement funds are owned and operated by local governments; therefore, projects using these funds are • Addressing MASP goals (asset management) by reduc- selected by the airports themselves, not the MDOT Office ing system and facility deficiencies. of Aeronautics. However, projects are ranked according • Preserving critical infrastructure, particularly pave- to a priority system, and the airports are encouraged to ments, navigational aids and airspace. select projects that not only benefit the airport, but the • Maximizing federal funds and leveraging state, local system as well. and private funding. In addition, the MDOT Office of Aeronautics can and does • Supporting job growth and economic development provide supplemental funding for projects and makes the through projects related to freight/logistics, aircraft decision on which projects receive these funds through the maintenance, and other emerging opportunities. State Block Grant Program. FAA also provides supplemental • Supporting air service passengers statewide. funding for projects at airports they select. All project funding decisions regarding use of supplemental dollars To the extent possible over the next five years, efforts are made based on the Michigan Aviation System Plan will continue to focus on integration with other modes of (MASP) or published FAA priorities, as appropriate. An transportation, addressing environmental issues, public updated version of the MASP was adopted by the Michigan awareness/outreach, and education. Aeronautics Commission at their July 2017 meeting. In 2016, the ACIP showed a gap between the needs A key provision in the new MASP is the added emphasis identified by airports and anticipated funding of to the economic benefits to the local community and approximately $60 million per year, or $300 million over Michigan. It will be possible for MDOT Office of five years. Today, that gap is nearly $80 million annually, Aeronautics staff to provide individual communities a or $400 million over the five-year period. This growing Community Benefits Assessment. This assessment will shortfall is due to the increased cost of delaying and help local officials communicate the importance of phasing projects versus being able to accomplish them in their airport to the community. It will also aid the Office a single effort. This difference can be narrowed somewhat of Aeronautics to determine which projects are more by discretionary funding, which is distributed by FAA important to the economic benefit of Michigan. As of a on a regional basis among various states. Michigan has recent statewide economic impact study completed in competed well for these funds and, given the identified 2017, the economic benefit of Michigan’s airports (direct needs, will continue to aggressively pursue these oppor- and indirect categories) totals approximately $22 billion. tunities. Additional state and other funding options will continue to be explored to impact the shortfall.

42 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Highlighting Upcoming FY 2019

The Michigan Department of Transportation’s (MDOT) $2.1 billion FY 2019 Transportation Program is a vital part of Michigan’s economy, estimated to support 21,448 jobs. This program continues to emphasize preservation of the transportation system, safe mobility for motorists, and efficient system operations. In FY 2019, MDOT will invest approximately $1.6 billion in system preservation, maintenance, safety, and operation of Michigan’s state trunkline roads and bridges. The preservation and safety of Michigan’s existing transportation system continue to be MDOT’s highest priorities. MDOT’s FY 2019 Multi-Modal Program provides for capital and operating assistance, technical support, and safety oversight of the air, passenger rail, rail freight, marine and port, intercity bus, charter bus, limousine, and local transit sectors of Michigan’s transportation system. In FY 2019, MDOT will invest $521 million in state, federal, local, and private funds to maintain Michigan’s multi-modal operations and infrastructure.

FY 2019 MDOT Transportation Program $2.1 Billion $3237 $957

$1,3

$1015

Totals in chart shown in millions. 43 MDOT FY 2019 Transportation Program

Highway Program Revenue Assumptions: The announced FY 2019 Highway Program investment is consistent with anticipated federal and state revenues. It is projected that approximately $860 million in federal funding will be available in FY 2019 for the highway capital program. The state revenue estimate is based on the Michigan Department of Treasury forecast for the State Trunkline Fund (STF), which includes revenue for state trunkline routine maintenance. The estimated state transportation revenue available for the FY 2019 trunkline capital program and routine maintenance totals $800 million, after allowing for the state portion of debt service.

Public Transportation Program Revenue Assumptions: The FY 2019 Public Transportation Program (bus, marine, passenger rail, freight rail, and port programs) is based on the state FY 2019 budget and includes federal, state, local, and private revenue. The FY 2019 program budget includes $321.5 million of CTF. This is comprised of ORTA's revenue estimates and estimated unreserved CTF fund balance at the end of FY 2018. The FY 2019 CTF program appropriation is approximately 5.1 percent more than the FY 2018 CTF appropriation. The rail program's revenue assumptions also include a continuation of dedicated federal and MTF funding allocations for rail crossing programs at FY 2018 levels and $10 million of federal spending authority in anticipation of grant opportunities under the FAST Act. The Passenger Transportation program's revenue assumptions include over $59 million of federal spending authority.

Aviation Program Revenue Assumptions: Based upon the most current estimates available, the Office of Aeronautics’ ongoing federal aid is projected to possibly increase or remain unchanged for FY 2019 from FY 2018 levels. The Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) was extended through FY 2018, with a new program expected to be passed in 2018. Estimates have been developed using the previous AIP levels of federal funding. A new source of state aviation revenue was authorized in December 2015, which has provided an additional stable source of funds. This new funding from sales tax revenues on aviation fuel was originally estimated at approximately $12 million yearly, but has since been revised down to $2.5 million yearly. Along with the Parking Tax and Aviation Fuel Excise Tax, these funds are sufficient to match current federal funding.

Interested in an FY 2019 MDOT project? Please go to the project list starting on page 62 or go to the MDOT website at http://mdotnetpublic.state.mi.us/fyp/.

44 $2.1 Billion Total Investment

FY 2019 FY 2019 MDOT Highway Program Passenger Transportation $1.6 Billion $323.7 Million , $72 $1499 $8 $74 $552 $179 $04 $339 $ $1908

$1895 $3347 Highway Program Investment Strategy $30 $39 • The FY 2019 Repair and Rebuild Roads $556.2 million total includes: Passenger Transportation - 379 lane miles of reconstruction and rehabilitation. - 1,239 lane miles of capital preventive maintenance. Investment Strategy: - 363 lane miles of freeway and non-freeway • Act 51 defines how the CTF will be expended. resurfacing. • Preservation of existing local transit and marine services. • Bridge preservation activities, including bridge rehabili- - 78 local bus agencies. tation and reconstruction and capital preventive mainte- - Four passenger ferry systems. nance, will total $189.5 million. - 38 specialized service providers. • The Trunkline Modernization Program totals $334.7 million, - More than 90 million public transit trips in FY 2016. including the I-75 modernization project in • Preservation of state-subsidized intercity bus service. Oakland County (from 8 Mile Road to Coolidge Road) and - Five MDOT-contracted routes. the I-94 modernization project in Wayne County including - One demonstration-contracted route using only federal bridges at East Grand Boulevard, Grand River Avenue, and private funds. Frontenac Street, Burns Avenue, and two Conrail Railroad - One interstate route jointly funded with WisDOT. bridges over I-94, along with Milwaukee Avenue over I-75. - Four intercity bus/rail passenger transportation facilities. • Routine maintenance activities will total an estimated $339 million. • Preservation and maintenance of existing infrastructure. • Limited funding for regional transit improvements

Totals in charts shown in millions. 45

FY 2019 FY 2019 Rail and Port Program Aviation Program $95.7 Million $101.5 Million

$45 $2305 $025 $1 $135 $7820 $102 $5 $3 $04 $2

Rail Investment Strategy: Aviation Investment Strategy: • Passenger Rail Priorities are a significant part of the funding decision that - Amtrak operating support for three Michigan corridors. supports the organizational mission and represents the - Maintenance efforts on the Kalamazoo-Dearborn corridor. overall vision, driving the airport infrastructure investment - Capital improvements on the Kalamazoo-Dearborn corridor strategy. For the Office of Aeronautics, these priorities that enhance and increase ridership. include: • Grade Crossing Safety • Apply an asset management approach to reduce system - Local roads - warning device enhancements at and facility deficiencies (Michigan Aviation System Plan approximately 30 locations. 2017). - Local roads - crossing surface improvements at • Preserve critical infrastructure, particularly pavements, approximately 60-80 locations. navigational aids and protect airspace. The Office of - State trunklines - crossing surface improvements and/or Aeronautics goal is to maintain 90 percent of all Tier I device upgrades at approximately 20 locations (funding Airports’ primary runways in good or fair condition reflected within Highway Capital Program). as determined by Pavement Condition Index (PCI) - Local roads and state trunklines - special push on crossing inspections. eliminations through track relocation (related to FY 2017 influx of federal grade crossing dollars). • Maximize federal funds by leveraging state, local and private funding. • Freight Rail • Support job growth and economic development - Support new/expanding businesses through Freight Economic Development Program. through projects related to freight/logistics, aircraft maintenance, and other emerging opportunities. - Conduct calls for projects under Michigan Rail Loan Assistance Program (MiRLAP) as funding allows. • Support statewide efforts to attract and retain air service - Limited capital investments in the 530-mile state-owned through the implementation of the Air Service Program. freight-only system. The Office of Aeronautics is committed to becoming more • Port Development efficient and reducing overhead in program administra- - Provide operating assistance to the Detroit-Wayne tion. Recent innovations include new methods of invoic- County Port Authority for administrative and marketing ing, scheduling, and planning. Additional innovations are expenditures. being explored for further cost reductions and service improvements.

Totals in charts shown in millions. 46 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

MDOT’s Multi-Modal Investment Strategy (Subject to appropriation of state, federal and local funds)

Annual Average Five-Year Total AVIATION Airport Improvement Program (AIP)* $101.5 million $507.5 million

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Local Transit, Intercity Bus, Passenger Rail, Rail Freight, and Ports** $2.1 billion

TOTAL $2.6 billion

* Includes comprehensive program of needed investments for primary airports and general aviation airports, as identified in the MDOT ACIP. ** Includes federal, local, private, and other state expenditure authority, which is often overstated to account for potential revenue.

47 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Performance Highway Pavement Condition Goal Measurement and MDOT maintains jurisdiction over trunkline pavements, which include all I, M, and US routes. These roads are System Condition important trade routes, business corridors, and keys to Michigan’s economic development policy, carrying 53 MDOT Performance percent of passenger traffic and 66 percent of commercial Measurement traffic in the state. MDOT uses remaining service life (RSL) data to monitor Maintaining and growing Michigan’s economy depends the performance of pavement on the trunkline system on the preservation, modernization, and efficient and to make program development and project selection operation of its transportation system. To achieve decisions. RSL measures a pavement’s overall condition the goals that have been set forth, it is necessary to and is defined as the estimated remaining time in years benchmark and monitor the performance of the system. until a pavement’s most cost-effective treatment requires MDOT formalized its approach to improving, measuring, either reconstruction or major repair. When pavements and reporting the condition of its transportation reach an RSL of two years or less, they are “poor,” meaning networks with the STC’s 1997 adoption of pavement they require these more expensive fixes. MDOT employs condition goals. Since then, MDOT has developed an asset management approach that implements short, performance measures to reflect a broader range of medium, and long-term improvements to maintain the transportation system. The following sections reflect a MOT T P representative sample of the performance measures that 100 MDOT uses to track 95 highway, aviation, and passenger 90 transportation modes of travel. 85 80

75 70

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Source: MDOT, BTP, SSMS, as of 5/21/2018

48 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

overall pavement health, and strives to employ an appropriate mix of fixes to keep its pavement infrastructure in Federal Performance the best condition possible. However, without adequate Measures funding, more sections of pavement are expected to slip into poor condition, requiring higher costs to repair them The first set of MDOT targets are due to be reported to in the long run. FHWA by Oct. 1, 2018, and MDOT has developed a process and methodology to establish these targets. Leading The graph on page 48 represents historic state trunkline this process are Transportation Performance Measure system condition based on RSL. In 2007, MDOT surpassed (TPM) Implementation Teams for pavement, pavement its goal of 90 percent of pavement in good or fair data, and bridges. This rule is one of eight released by condition and maintained this condition through 2010. FHWA to implement the requirements of MAP-21 and the However, as of 2017, pavement condition was measured FAST Act. Each rule has TPM Implementation Teams that at 79 percent, down 4 percent from the previous year. are responsible for developing strategies and timelines As the graph demonstrates, the deterioration rate since for executing the rule, ensuring compliance, and estab- 2011 has been about 1 percent per year. However, this lishing targets. These teams report to a core Implementa- is forecasted to accelerate considerably in the coming tion Team that ensures all rules are coordinated, and that years. Additional revenue from increases to the state strategies and targets are reported to and approved by gas tax and vehicle registration fees, alongside general MDOT executives. fund transfers, will help to slow pavement deterioration, but projections indicate these funds are not enough to meet pavement goals in future years, or to even sustain current conditions. Due to Act 51, this new revenue must be distributed to more than 600 transportation agencies in Michigan. While this will help to slow the decline of infrastructure throughout the state, critical trunkline routes will not receive enough funding to improve overall pavement conditions.

49 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

condition will again fall below the freeway bridge goal. As Bridge Condition Goal shown in the chart below, MDOT has met and sustained MDOT’s Bridge Management System (BMS) is an import- the non-freeway bridge goal of 85 percent good or fair ant part of the overall asset management process. BMS is condition since 2006. a strategic approach to linking data, strategies, programs, and projects into a systematic process to ensure achievement of the desired results. An important tool within the BMS used by MDOT to develop preservation policies is the Bridge Condition Forecasting System (BCFS). Working from current bridge conditions, bridge deterioration rates, project costs, expected inflation, and fix strategies, BCFS estimates the future condition of the state trunkline bridge system. MDOT bridge conditions were close to 95 percent good or fair at the end of 2013, declined slightly in 2014 and 2015, but increased again in 2016 and met the freeway bridge condition goal of 95 percent at the end of 2016. However, projections indicate that, without additional funding, the freeway bridge condition will decline and bridge

T F N-F

100

95 95

85 85 2022

2022 80 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026

50 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Safety Goals S F 1,200 1,04 1,028 MDOT’s safety goal is to reduce fatalities and serious 93 93 951 injuries on the state trunkline system in support of 1,000 87 97 the Michigan Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) 800 and the department’s efforts of achieving the vision of Toward Zero Deaths (TZD). 00 400 To meet that goal, the strategy of the Safety Program 200 is to select cost-effective safety improvements, as 2018 identified in the SHSP, to address trunkline locations 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 201 2017 2018 with correctable fatality (K) and serious injury (A) crashes. Improvements identified will support the T F key focus areas of the SHSP. 500 450 400 454 427 432 The purpose of the SHSP is to identify key safety needs 350 384 382 384 in the state and guide investment decisions that 300

250 achieve significant reductions in highway fatalities 200 and serious injuries. The SHSP identifies four broad 150 100 emphasis areas: high-risk behaviors, at-risk road users, 50 engineering infrastructure, and system administration. 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 201 2017 2018 Of these areas, engineering infrastructure is predom- inately addressed by the Safety Program through S S I intersection safety and lane departure projects. In 7,000 ,084 addition, pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements 5,7 5,34 are the department’s emphasis for at-risk road users. ,000 5,000 4,00 5,283 4,909 Michigan’s SHSP was adopted in December 2004 by 4,000 4,85 the Governor’s Traffic Safety Advisory Commission 3,000 and endorsed by the governor in 2006. In December 2,000 2016, the SHSP goal was revised to prevent traffic 1,000 fatalities from reaching 967 and to prevent serious 2018 0 traffic injuries from reaching 4,600 in 2018. In 2017, 2012 2013 2014 2015 201 2017 2018 there were 1,028 fatalities and 6,084 serious injuries reported statewide. T S I

3,000 MDOT’s vision is TZD with the ultimate goal to reduce 2,54 2,295 2,22 2,30 fatalities to zero and minimize serious injuries. In 2,500 2,084 2,002 2017, there were 454 fatalities and 2,360 serious 2,000 injuries reported on the state trunkline system. 1,500 1,000 To the right are statewide and trunkline graphs that 500 compare the actual values of fatalities and serious 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 201 2017 2018 injuries compared to the 2018 SHSP goals.

51 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Multi-Modal Performance Measures Local Transit Performance Measures The OPT considers many factors when planning the investment strategy for local transit. Two primary performance measures considered are the condition of the rural transit fleet and the local transit level of service. • The condition of the rural transit fleet is based on the percent of vehicles past their useful life. The goal is to have less than 20 percent of the rural fleet beyond useful life. That goal was achieved in 2014 due to a • The local transit level of service is measured using combination of federal State of Good Repair grants total annual hours and miles of service and total and the fact that fewer vehicles were eligible for annual passenger trips (considering elderly/disabled replacement that year. Unfortunately, in 2016 the passenger trips as a subset of the total). The goal is to percentage went back up to 36 percent of the eligible preserve service levels and continue providing service fleet unfunded. One of the factors contributing to the in all 83 counties. Service levels peaked in 2008 when increase in these numbers is that many of the buses gas prices soared, then started to return to lower levels previously put into service with federal funding from as gas prices stabilized. Service is still available in all the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) 83 counties of the state and service levels are starting are now reaching their useful life and are eligible for to return to previous points. Transit agencies continue replacement. MDOT will submit annual applications to to innovate to increase their service levels. MDOT is FTA under the new Buses and Bus Facilities competitive hopeful that this innovation in combination with the program in the FAST Act in hopes of improving and slight increase in state operating assistance will show stabilizing fleet condition. positive results over the life of this five-year program. • There are federal performance P R S T V measures required for the E condition of transit assets - 40 revenue vehicles, service

35 vehicles and facilities. The OPT established 2018 targets for the 30 condition of these three asset 25 20 classes and is developing a 20 Transit Asset Management Plan 15 for the rural system.

0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201 2017 2018

52 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

T S I

120,000,000

100,000,000

80,000,000

0,000,000

40,000,000

20,000,000

0 2013 2014 2015 201 2017

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Passenger Trips Total 96,198,970 89,444,565 89,692,521 89,380,345 83,716,947 (excluding marine)

Elderly and Disabled Passenger Trips 12,587,813 12,269,803 12,727,836 12,999,471 12,850,063 (as subset of total - excluding marine)

Hours of Service (excluding marine) 6,035,194 6,717,358 6,470,836 8,371,898 6,940,453

Miles of Service 98,077,359 96,770,436 101,523,828 94,670,531 109,152,183 (excluding marine and special service)

Intercity Bus Performance Measure The factor used to determine the investment strategy for intercity bus service is to provide reasonable access to intercity bus service in rural areas where connectivity to the national transportation network is often difficult to attain. MDOT’s goal is to preserve the existing level of service, which has 81 percent of the rural population within 25 miles of an intercity bus stop. The national average is 78 percent.

53 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

MDOT does not own or control local transit service levels, nor does it own or control the entire intercity bus network in Michigan. In addition, the state and federal funding that MDOT uses to support local transit and intercity bussing is only a portion of the total cost of operating and maintaining the service. While MDOT has established performance measures for these modes to help guide its investment decisions, MDOT cannot on its own ensure that the performance measures are met.

54 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Rail Performance Measures P R R T Two rail-related goals are included in MDOT’s performance M R A N measurement efforts. 600,000 32,400,000 MDOT tracks the total number of passengers using state-sup- 500,000 30,400,000 ported passenger rail services, with a goal of maintaining 400,000 28,400,000 ridership consistent with (within 10 percent) or better 300,000 26,400,000 than national trends. MDOT is meeting its goal. 200,000 24,400,000

MDOT also tracks the railroad 100,000 22,400,000 crossing surface condition on the state trunkline system, 0 20,400,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 with a goal of at least 90 percent in good or fair condition. The percentage of the railroad crossing surfaces on the state T -R G trunkline system in at least fair S condition continues to increase. 100 At the end of FY 2017, 93.8 912 911 92 94 938 percent of the crossing surfaces 90 were in good or fair condition. 80

70 60

20 88 89 74 54 2 10

0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

55 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Aviation Performance Measures • Measure: Airport Pavement Condition Index (PCI) The Office of Aeronautics has recently updated its • Target: Maintain 90 percent of Tier 1 Airport Primary Michigan Aviation System Plan (MASP) for 2017. This Runways in good or fair condition comprehensive document is typically updated only once every eight years. As part of the update, new statewide system goals (as well as individual airport facility goals) were developed. The economic impact of aviation in Michigan was also determined both by individual airports and on a statewide basis. The updated MASP has established new benchmarks for many of the Office of Aeronautics’ system and facility goals, which will allow for the accurate tracking of future progress toward achieving various aviation-related developmental goals. The Office of Aeronautics’ current primary performance measurement goal is to maintain 90 percent of all Tier 1 Airport Primary Runways in good or fair condition, as determined by Pavement Condition Index (PCI) inspections. Previously, the goal was to maintain 100 percent of all Tier 1 Airport Primary Runways in “good or better” condition. This recent change, effective with the 2016 reporting year, allows the Office of Aeronautics to better align its pavement condition performance measurement goal with that of MDOT highways. The latest inspections show that the achievement rate toward the current goal (based on 2017 data) is 83 percent.

Pavements in “Good T 1 A P R P or Better” condition, as determined by former PCI rating methodology. 87 84 8 84 82 81 83 Transition Period - 77 Pavement evaluation 9 methodology was revised in 2014, resulting in an overall decrease in PCI number.

Pavements in “Good or Fair” condition, as determined by current PCI rating methodology.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

56 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

the Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI), and the Economic Impacts University of Michigan’s calibration of REMI’s standard control to evaluate the investment outcomes. of Transportation This analysis includes the spending impacts of capital and operations investment in the highway and bridges Investments program and the economic benefits derived from the travel efficiencies. The travel efficiencies were assessed by using the statewide Travel Demand Model to evaluate Highway Economic Impacts changes of traffic data in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and Highway infrastructure investment is a vital part of the vehicle hours traveled (VHT) based on build and no-build department’s strategy for economic development. An scenarios of the proposed five-year projects. efficient highway system in good condition plays an integral role in supporting the economy of the state. To The following table and chart display statewide economic assess the economic impact of the FY 2019-2023 Highway impacts of MDOT’s FY 2019-2023 Highway and Bridge and Bridge Program, MDOT uses the Michigan Benefits Program. Estimation System for Transportation Tool (MI BEST Tool),

Economic Impacts of FY 2019-2023 Highway and Bridge Program

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Investment (million $) $1,636 $1,817 $1,829 $1,756 $1,676 $8,714 Employment Impact (jobs) 21,448 23,955 23,929 22,529 21,016 112,877 Gross State Product (million ‘18$) $1,777 $2,042 $2,091 $2,013 $1,916 $9,839 Real Personal Income (million ‘18$) $1,404 $1,624 $1,706 $1,686 $1,663 $8,083

I E - P

30,000 $3,000

25,000 23,955 23,929 $2,500 22,529 21,448 21,01 20,000 $2,000

$1,829 $1,817 $1,75 15,000 $1,3 $1,7 $1,500

10,000 $1,000

5,000 $500

0 $0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

57 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

To assess the economic impacts of the FY 2019-2023 Public Transportation Transit Program (public transportation program), Economic Impacts including additional programming as a result of the new funding package, MDOT staff used the MI BEST Tool Local Transit and the Regional Economic Models, Inc. to evaluate the investment outcomes. Transportation investments are a vital part of the state’s overall economic development strategy. More than The resulting economic impacts reflect the statewide 83 million trips are made annually on local public transit $1.6 billion investment for the Transit Program in this in Michigan. While the direct benefits of transit to its users Five-Year Transportation Plan. This public transportation are clear, it can be shown that the overall benefits of these program will support an average of 5,334 jobs annually trips extend beyond transit riders. Through improved and add $2.5 billion in real personal income and mobility, safety, air quality, and economic development, $2 billion in gross state product for this five-year period. public transit also benefits users of the roadway network In this analysis, the spending-only impacts of capital and the community at large. Many of these trips satisfy and operations investment in public transportation the mobility needs of numerous households for whom were considered. owning and driving a vehicle is not an effective or afford- able transportation option. As a result, there are societal The following table displays economic impacts of MDOT’s benefits that result from providing essential mobility. FY 2019-2023 Transit Program for the state of Michigan.

Economic Impacts of FY 2019-2023 Transit Program

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Investment (millions) $306 $310 $314 $318 $321 $1,569 Employment Impact (jobs) 5,329 5,369 5,388 5,335 5,248 26,670 Real Personal Income (million ‘16 $) $470 $492 $503 $506 $508 $2473 Gross State Product (million ‘16 $) $408 $418 $426 $428 $427 $2,106

Economic Impacts of FY 2019-2023 Transit Program Although this analysis attempts to assess the benefits of transit in a comprehensive manner, it does not account for the considerable additional benefits that can arise from rapid transit investments in urban areas. Therefore, the results of the model can be considered conservative. National models have shown that a dollar invested in light rail or rapid transit can return up to $6 in economic benefits, including local economic development around transit stops.

58 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Rail Program Benefits Michigan’s rail system has approximately 3,600 miles of track operated by 28 railroads. It carries about 19 percent of the state’s freight tonnage. These commodities totaled more than $160 billion in 2013. Rail is particularly important for the movement of heavy and bulky commodities, as well as hazardous materials. Growing healthy rail corridors is good for Michigan’s economy, whether a corridor is specifically freight, passenger, or both. For the federally designated Chicago-Detroit/ Pontiac accelerated rail corridor, MDOT will continue to improve the 135 miles of state-owned track between Kalamazoo and Dearborn. MDOT will have an opportunity to encourage and expand economic development along this corridor for both passenger and freight rail interests. In addition, when funding permits, MDOT will work with the Michigan Economic Development Corp., as well as the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, to provide support to rail-reliant businesses throughout the state, most directly by helping provide access to the system through the Freight Economic Development Program.

59 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Economic benefits also include expenditures made by Aviation Economic Impacts those transient passengers who use the airport but To maintain a competitive advantage in a global eco- spend money throughout the region. Airports also nomic environment, access to convenient and efficient provide savings in time and money as a result of the air travel is essential. While commercial airline services travel efficiencies they create. In addition, economic are often the most recognizable facet of aviation, the benefits include the intangible effect an airport has on fact is that general aviation accounts for 97 percent of business decisions to locate or remain in a specific area. the nation’s airports. These airports support a variety of Finally, and somewhat less tangible, are quality of life aviation activities that employ thousands of people and benefits provided by an airport. Examples include police create millions of dollars in economic impact and benefit. and firefighting support, search and rescue, recreation, emergency medical flights, on-demand charter services, Businesses through the state depend on airports for the and flight instruction for future pilots. movement of goods and personnel. Benefits associated with airports include direct and indirect jobs, wages, Significant Aviation Program Accomplishments and expenditures. They also include the economic ripple effects in the community, enhancing economic activities Over the last 20 years, the Office of Aeronautics has expe- far from the airport itself. In a state like Michigan, airports rienced up and down funding levels. Federal funding has serve a vital role in supporting rural communities, partic- risen, but state funding has fallen. Through the funding ularly in the Upper Peninsula. swings, the modernization of the Michigan Airport System has made great progress with many significant • Aviation, both commercial and general, is big business projects. A partial list includes: in Michigan. • New terminal buildings at Detroit Metro Airport, Cherry • Aviation accounts for more than 183,000 jobs in the Capital Airport (Traverse City), Pellston Regional Airport state of Michigan.* of Emmet County, West Michigan Regional Airport • Aviation contributes more than $22 billion annually to (Holland), MBS International Airport (Saginaw), Bishop Michigan’s economy.* International Airport (Flint), and Livingston County • Michigan airports serve more than 39 million passen- Airport (Howell). gers each year.** • Large runway extension at Southwest Michigan • Michigan airports move more than 600 million pounds Regional Airport (Benton Harbor), West Michigan of air cargo each year.** Regional Airport (Holland), Hillsdale Municipal Airport, and Fremont Municipal Airport. * Michigan Aviation System Plan 2017 ** Intermodal Management System • New runway at Jackson County – Reynolds Field. • Boeing 747-capable hangar at Oscoda – Wurtsmith Airport. • Snow removal storage and maintenance building at W.K. Kellogg Airport (Battle Creek).

60 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

KEWEENAW SUPERIOR Regional Service Areas HOUGHTON

ONTONAGON BARAGA LUCE F H GOGEBIC Ishpeming M Newberry MARQUETTE ALGER IRON CHIPPEWA SCHOOLCRAFT MACKINAC DICKINSON Crystal Falls DELTA

N E

Escanaba G MENOMINEE EMMET

CHEBOYGAN PRESQUE ISLE

I NORTH CHARLEVOIX REGION OFFICE OTSEGO ALPENA TSC OFFICE ANTRIM MONTMORENCY Alpena LEELANAU Gaylord REGION/TSC OFFICE Traverse City CRAWFORD OSCODA ALCONA BENZIE GRAND WELCOME CENTER TRAVERSE KALKASKA REGION BOUNDARY OGEMAWIOSCO WEXFORD TSC SERVICE AREA MANISTEE MISSAUKEE ROSCOMMON Cadillac

serving Grand Region Lake, Mecosta, Montcalm, Newaygo & Osceola counties BAY SUPERIOR CLARE ARENAC GLADWIN NORTH MASON LAKE OSCEOLA A HURON GRAND BAY ISABELLAMIDLAND Bay City SOUTHWEST OCEANA NEWAYGO MECOSTA TUSCOLA SANILAC UNIVERSITY Mt. Pleasant BAY Muskegon MONTCALM GRATIOT Saginaw SAGINAW MUSKEGON GENESEE METRO LAPEER Grand ST. CLAIR L Rapids SHIAWASSEE Davison GRAND OTTAWA KENT IONIA WELCOME CENTERS CLINTON MACOMB A. CLARE...... BAY Oakland B. COLDWATER...... SWR ALLEGAN BARRY OAKLAND INGHAM LIVINGSTON C. DETROIT...... MET Macomb EATON Lansing Southﬁeld D. DUNDEE...... UNV Brighton E. IRON MOUNTAIN...... SUP METRO WAYNE F. IRONWOOD...... SUP JACKSON C Detroit CALHOUN WASHTENAW (excludes Wayne County) G. MACKINAW CITY...... NOR VAN BUREN KALAMAZOO Taylor H. MARQUETTE...... SUP Jackson (excludes Detroit) I. MENOMINEE...... SUP Marshall Kalamazoo MONROE J. MONROE...... UNV BRANCH HILLSDALE LENAWEE K. NEW BUFFALO...... SWR BERRIEN CASSST. JOSEPH D J L. PORT HURON...... MET B M. SAULT STE. MARIE...... SUP K N. ST. IGNACE...... SUP SOUTHWEST UNIVERSITY

61 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

CLARE ARENAC 18 GLADWIN 6 26 HURON A 32 BAY Bay ISABELLA MIDLAND 9 City 37 56

Mt. Pleasant TUSCOLA SANILAC BAY REGION 79 74 GRATIOT Saginaw 29 SAGINAW 73 GENESEE 25 LAPEER 44 ST. CLAIR L SHIAWASSEE 77 76 Davison

BAY REGION BRIDGE - BIG BRIDGE PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 BAY M-13 M-13 AND M-84 OVER E CHANNEL SAGINAW RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON 0.000 BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ARENAC US-23 I-75 SB OVER SOUTH BRANCH PINE RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON ARENAC US-23 I-75 NB OVER SOUTH BRANCH PINE RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON ARENAC US-23 WORTH ROAD OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ARENAC US-23 US-23 OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ARENAC US-23 I-75 SB OVER M-61 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ARENAC US-23 I-75 NB OVER M-61 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ARENAC US-23 LINCOLN ROAD OVER I-75 SB OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ARENAC US-23 LINCOLN ROAD OVER I-75 NB OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ARENAC US-23 US-23 RAMP F I-75 OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON BAY I-75 I-75 SB OVER KAWKAWLIN RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 NB OVER KAWKAWLIN RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 OVER HEMBLING DRAIN JOINT REPAIR CON BAY I-75 I-75 SB OVER M-13 CONNECTOR OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 SB OVER WHEELER ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 SB OVER BEAVER ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 NB OVER WHEELER ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 NB OVER BEAVER ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON BAY I-75 I-75 NB OVER M-13 CONNECTOR SOUTHBOUND OVERLAY - DEEP CON GENESEE I-475 OVER FLINT RIVER, WEST BOULEVARD AND RIVER SIDE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON GENESEE I-475 OVER CSX RAILROAD AND NB SERVICE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON GENESEE I-475 I-475 OVER M-54 BR (SAGINAW STREET) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON GENESEE I-475 I-475 AND RAMP B OVER SB SERVICE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON GENESEE I-475 I-475 OVER STEVER - BROADWAY AVENUES OVERLAY - EPOXY CON GENESEE I-475 I-475 OVER LEITH STREET OVERLAY - EPOXY CON NB I-75 RAMP TO WB I-69 OVER GTW RAILROAD AND I-75 GENESEE I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON OVER BRISTOL ROAD GRATIOT US-127 US-127 NB OVER MAPLE RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ISABELLA US-127 US-127 NB OVER M-20 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ISABELLA US-127 US-127 SB OVER M-20 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON ISABELLA US-127 US-127 BR NB OVER US-127 SB DECK REPLACEMENT CON ISABELLA US-127 US-127 BR NB OVER US-127 SB DECK REPLACEMENT CON SHIAWASSEE I-69 I-69 EB OVER LOOKING GLASS RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON SHIAWASSEE I-69 I-69 WB OVER LOOKING GLASS RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON SHIAWASSEE I-69 I-69 EB OVER WEBB DRAIN SCOUR PROTECTION CON SHIAWASSEE I-69 I-69 WB OVER WEBB DRAIN SCOUR PROTECTION CON ST. CLAIR M-29 M-29 OVER SWAN CREEK JOINT REPLACEMENT CON 0.000

EPE= Study/Environmental PE=Preliminary Engineering/Design PE-B=Preliminary Engineering/Design for Bridges UTL=Utility work ROW=Right of way/Real Estate CON=Construction 62 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

BRIDGE REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ARENAC US-23 MELITA ROAD OVER US-23 SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON BAY I-75 WILDER ROAD OVER I-75 DECK REPLACEMENT CON BAY I-75 CHIP ROAD OVER I-75 DECK REPLACEMENT CON BAY I-75 MACKINAW ROAD OVER I-75 DECK REPLACEMENT CON BAY I-75 I-75 SB OVER NORTH BRANCH KAWKAWLIN RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON BAY I-75 I-75 NB OVER NORTH BRANCH KAWKAWLIN RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON BAY I-75 PARISH ROAD OVER I-75 DECK REPLACEMENT CON GENESEE M-15 (State Road) M-15 OVER PADDISON COUNTY DRAIN CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON GENESEE M-21 M-21 OVER CSX RAILROAD CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON GRATIOT M-57 M-57 OVER BRADLEY DRAIN CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON GRATIOT US-127 US-127 SB OVER MAPLE RIVER SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON SAGINAW M-46 I-75 OVER CSX RAILROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON SAGINAW M-46 M-46 OVER I-75 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON SAGINAW M-52 M-52 OVER MARSH CREEK SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON SANILAC M-46 (Sanilac Road) M-46 OVER BLACK RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON 0.000 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ARENAC US-23 I-75 TO M-13 ROAD REHABILITATION 3.055 CON BAY I-75 BEAVER ROAD TO COTTAGE GROVE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.600 CON BAY I-75 M-13 CONNECTOR TO BEAVER ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 5.328 CON BAY M-13 (Huron Road) NORTH STREET TO BAY/ARENAC COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.335 CON BAY US-10 7 MILE ROAD TO BAY CITY RECONSTRUCTION 5.485 CON CLARE US-10 (W Ludington Drive) CLAREOLA ROAD TO 1,500 FT WEST OF LUDINGTON DRIVE ROAD REHABILITATION 8.083 CON GENESEE I-69 FENTON ROAD TO M-54 RECONSTRUCTION 5.256 CON GENESEE M-15 (State Road) NORTH OF RICHFIELD ROAD TO SOUTH OF DODGE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 4.885 CON GENESEE M-54 (Dort Highway) COLDWATER ROAD TO MT MORRIS ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 2.027 CON GRATIOT US-127 GREAT LAKES CENTRAL RR CROSSING TO BAGLEY ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 5.994 CON HURON M-142 (Sand Beach Road) JOHNSTON ROAD TO RUTH ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.092 CON HURON M-142 (Sand Beach Road) M-53 TO M-19 ROAD REHABILITATION 2.843 CON ISABELLA M-20 (E Pickard Street) US-127 BUSINESS ROUTE (MISSION STREET) TO US-127 RECONSTRUCTION 1.621 CON ISABELLA M-20 (W Remus Road) WEST COUNTY LINE TO GILMORE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.942 CON ISABELLA US-127 US-127 BUSINESS ROUTE TO RIVER ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.867 CON LAPEER M-53 (Van Dyke Road) DEANVILLE ROAD TO MARLETT SOUTH CITY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 9.226 CON LAPEER M-53 (VanDyke Road) BOWERS ROAD TO DEANVILLE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 8.184 CON MIDLAND M-30 (N Meridian Road) US-10 TO WIXOM LAKE ROAD REHABILITATION 9.659 CON SAGINAW I-75 HESS TO SOUTH I-675 INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION 2.576 CON SAGINAW M-13 (Bay City Road) ZILWAUKEE BRIDGE TO BAY CITY SOUTH CITY LIMITS ROAD REHABILITATION 6.268 CON SAGINAW M-46 (Holland Road) TOWERLINE ROAD TO RICHVILLE ROAD REHABILITATION 10.421 CON SAGINAW M-52 (Oakley Road) SAGINAW COUNTY LINE NORTH TO M-57 ROAD REHABILITATION 3.996 CON SAGINAW M-57 (W Brady Road) SAGINAW/GRATIOT COUNTY LINE TO M-52 ROAD REHABILITATION 10.194 CON SAGINAW M-57 (Brady Road) M-52 TO 4TH STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 2.036 CON SANILAC M-25 (Lakeshore Road) PORT SANILAC TO DECKERVILLE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 6.866 CON SANILAC M-25 (Lakeshore Road) M-90 TO FRENCH LINE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.286 CON SHIAWASSEE I-69 CLINTON/SHIAWASSEE COUNTY LINE TO BATH ROAD BATH ROAD REHABILITATION 5.025 CON SHIAWASSEE I-69 BATH ROAD TO EAST OF M-52 ROAD REHABILITATION 4.447 CON ST. CLAIR I-69 COX DOTY DRAIN TO M-19 RECONSTRUCTION 5.240 CON ST. CLAIR I-69 M-19 TO TAYLOR ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 10.419 CON ST. CLAIR M-136 (Avoca Road) AVOCA TO KINGSLEY ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.074 CON ST. CLAIR M-29 (River Road) REMER ROAD TO RIVERSIDE AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.069 CON TUSCOLA M-15 (State Road) M-57 TO VASSAR ROAD REHABILITATION 12.156 CON TUSCOLA M-81 (E Cass City Road) CASS CITY ROAD TO CASS CITY ROAD REHABILITATION 4.421 CON 194.976 CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT - COUNTYWIDE COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ST. CLAIR MCMORRAN BOULEVARD COUNTYWIDE PLANNING EPE EPE 0.000 63 serving Grand Region counties 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Cadillac 43, 54, 59, 62 and 67

MASON LAKE OSCEOLA 53 43 67

OCEANA NEWAYGO MECOSTA 64 62 54

MuMuskegon MONTCALM 59 MUSKEGON GRAND REGION 61 Grand Rapids

OTTAWA KENT IONIA 70 41 34

ALLEGAN BARRY 3 8

GRAND REGION BRIDGE - BIG BRIDGE PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 OTTAWA US-31 (Bascule Bridge) US-31 OVER GRAND RIVER, M-104 CONNECTOR SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR, STEEL CON 0.000 BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALLEGAN I-196 I-196 WB OVER US-31 NB OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN I-196 I-196 E AND US-31 N OVER KALAMAZOO RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN I-196 I-196 W AND US-31 S OVER KALAMAZOO RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN I-196 I-196 WB OVER CSX RAILROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN US-31 NB US-31 BR (58TH) OVER US-31 NB OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN US-31 109TH AVENUE OVER I-196 AND US-31 OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN Old US-31 OLD US-31 OVER I-196 AND US-31 OVERLAY - DEEP CON ALLEGAN Old US-31 OLD US-31 OVER I-196 AND US-31 OVERLAY - DEEP CON IONIA I-96 I-96 UNDER JORDAN LAKE ROAD OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON KENT I-196 I-196 EB OVER M-45 WB RAMP TO I-196 WB OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON KENT I-196 EB I-196 EB OVER M-45 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON KENT I-196 I-196 RAMP M-21 BR OVER CSX RAILROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON KENT I-196 I-196 RAMP B M-21 BR I-196 OVER I-196 EB OVERLAY - EPOXY CON KENT I-196 I-196 RAMP A M-21 OVER M-21 BR (CHICAGO DRIVE) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON KENT I-96 I-96 UNDER BURTON STREET OVERLAY - DEEP CON KENT I-96 EB RAMP EB I-96 RAMP TO SB US-131 OVER W RIVER DRIVE OVERLAY - DEEP CON KENT US-131 SB US-131 OVER GRAND RIVER & FULTON STREE BARRIER REPLACEMENT CON KENT I-96 I-96 UNDER FRUIT RIDGE ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON I-96 I-96 OVER HILE ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON I-96 EB I-96 EB OVER NORRIS CREEK OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON I-96 WB I-96 WB OVER NORRIS CREEK OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON US-31 NB US-31 NB OVER RILEY THOMPSON ROAD OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON US-31 SB US-31 SB OVER WHITE RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON US-31 NB US-31 NB OVER WHITE RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON US-31 US-31 OVER GTW RAILROAD & M-104 OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON US-31 NB US-31 OVER S CHANNEL GRAND RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MUSKEGON US-31 SB US-31 OVER S CHANNEL GRAND RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON MUSKEGON US-31 US-31 OVER 3RD STREET OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MUSKEGON M-104 M-104 OVER SPRING LAKE CHANNEL OVERLAY - DEEP CON OCEANA Old US-31 Old US-31 OVER PENTWATER RIVER PAINTING COMPLETE CON OTTAWA I-196 BL I-196 BL EB OVER BR OF BLACK RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON OTTAWA I-196 BL I-196 BL WB OVER BR OF BLACK RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON OTTAWA I-196 EB I-196 EB OVER 32ND AVENUE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON OTTAWA I-196 WB I-196 WB OVER 32ND AVENUE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON OTTAWA I-196 WB I-196 WB OVER 22ND AVENUE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON 0.000 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALLEGAN I-196 AND US-31 SB I-196 WB AND US-31 SB OVER KUIPERS DRAIN CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON BARRY M-66 M-66 OVER QUAKER BROOK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON

64 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

GRAND REGION BRIDGE REPLACEMENT - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 IONIA I-96 CUTLER ROAD OVER I-96 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON KENT I-196 I-196 M-21 WB OVER PLYMOUTH ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON KENT I-196 I-196 EB, M-21 OVER GRAND RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON MECOSTA US-131 BR US-131 BR OVER DALZIEL CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON OCEANA US-31 BR (Polk Road) US-31 BR (POLK ROAD) OVER RUSSELL CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON 0.000 FREEWAY RESURFACING PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 MUSKEGON US-31 M-46 NORTH TO C&O RAILROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 5.550 CON 5.550 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALLEGAN I-196 WB 130TH AVENUE NORTH TO US-31 RECONSTRUCTION 7.375 CON ALLEGAN I-196 WB CSX RAILROAD EAST TO ALLEGAN/OTTAWA COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.086 CON ALLEGAN I-196 WB US-31 EAST TO CSX RAILROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 4.170 CON ALLEGAN M-179 (129th Avenue) US-131 EAST TO GRAND ELKS RAILROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 0.460 CON ALLEGAN M-40 106TH AVENUE NORTH TO M-89 ROAD REHABILITATION 4.484 CON ALLEGAN M-40 VAN BUREN/ALLEGAN COUNTY LINE NORTH TO 106TH AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.205 CON ALLEGAN M-89 (Main Street) 58TH STREET EAST TO 56TH STREET (FENNVILLE) ROAD REHABILITATION 1.165 CON ALLEGAN M-89 (Marshall Street) M-222 EAST TO 29TH STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 1.826 CON ALLEGAN US-31 I-196 NORTH TO CENTRAL AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.283 CON CENTRAL AVENUE NORTH TO ALLEGAN/ ALLEGAN US-31 ROAD REHABILITATION 1.238 CON OTTAWA COUNTY LINE BARRY M-66 BRUMM ROAD NORTH TO THORNAPPLE LAKE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.027 CON BARRY M-79 (Scott Road) BARRYVILLE ROAD EAST TO NASHVILLE WEST VILLAGE LIMIT ROAD REHABILITATION 3.330 CON IONIA I-96 BLISS ROAD EAST TO SUNFIELD HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY 9.260 CON IONIA I-96 WB BLISS ROAD EAST TO SUNFIELD HIGHWAY RECONSTRUCTION 9.061 CON IONIA M-21 (Lincoln Avenue) WALL STREET EAST TO M-66 (EAST JUNCTION) ROAD REHABILITATION 1.047 CON IONIA M-66 (State Road) M-50 NORTH TO PORTLAND ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 8.000 CON KENT I-196 FULLER AVENUE EAST TO I-96 RECONSTRUCTION 2.051 CON KENT I-196 I-196 M-21 EB OVER PLYMOUTH ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON KENT I-196 THE GRAND RIVER EAST TO LANE AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.501 CON KENT I-96 THORNAPPLE RIVER DRIVE EAST TO WHITNEYVILLE ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY 2.734 CON KENT I-96 THORNAPPLE RIVER DRIVE EAST TO WEST OF WHITNEYVILLE ROAD REHABILITATION 7.649 CON KENT I-96 CASCADE ROAD EAST TO M-11 ROAD REHABILITATION 3.025 CON KENT M-11 CHURCH STREET EAST TO US-131 ROAD REHABILITATION 4.203 CON KENT US-131 SB AT THE ROCKFORD REST AREA ROADSIDE FACILITIES - PRESERVE 0.000 CON MASON US-31 US-10 NORTH TO SUGAR GROVE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.735 CON OCEANA/MASON COUNTY LINE NORTH TO MASON US-31 ROAD REHABILITATION 4.560 CON MEISENHEIMER ROAD MASON US-31 HOAGUE ROAD NORTH TO MASON/MANISTEE COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.187 CON MECOSTA US-131 NB 13 MILE ROAD NORTH TO 19 MILE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.070 CON MONTCALM M-91 (Greenville Road) PECK ROAD NORTH TO COLBY ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.490 CON MUSKEGON M-120 (Holton Road) MID-MICHIGAN RAILROAD EAST TO GETTY STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 1.203 CON NEWAYGO M-37 (State Road) M-82 (S JUNCTION) NORTH TO THE MUSKEGON RIVER ROAD REHABILITATION 2.142 CON OCEANA US-31 NB AT THE ROTHBURY REST AREA #529 ROADSIDE FACILITIES - IMPROVE 0.938 CON OSCEOLA M-115 80TH AVENUE SOUTHEAST TO THE MIDDLE BRANCH RIVER ROAD REHABILITATION 1.084 CON WEXFORD/OSCEOLA COUNTY LINE SOUTHEAST OSCEOLA M-115 ROAD REHABILITATION 6.425 CON TO 20 MILE ROAD OSCEOLA M-115 50TH AVENUE SOUTHEAST TO 16 MILE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.270 CON OSCEOLA US-131 SB US-10 NORTH TO 14 MILE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.714 CON OTTAWA I-196 WB WEST OF 32ND AVENUE EAST TO OTTAWA/KENT COUNTY LINE RECONSTRUCTION 4.996 CON OTTAWA I-196 EB WEST OF 32ND AVENUE EAST TO OTTAWA/KENT COUNTY LINE RECONSTRUCTION 5.303 CON OTTAWA I-196 BYRON ROAD EAST TO 32ND AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 6.674 CON OTTAWA I-196 ALLEGAN/OTTAWA COUNTY LINE EAST TO BYRON ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.960 CON OTTAWA I-196 BYRON ROAD EAST TO 32ND AVENUE TRAFFIC SAFETY 6.874 CON 152.805 65 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

MACOMB Oakland 50 OAKLAND 63 Macomb METRO REGION Southﬁeld Detroit WAYNE C (excludes Wayne County) 82

Taylor (excludes Detroit)

METRO REGION BRIDGE - BIG BRIDGE PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 WAYNE I-75 OVER ROUGE RIVER, DEARBORN STREET AND RAILROAD SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON I-75 NB OFF RAMP OVER RAILROAD AND MAINTENANCE WAYNE I-75 NB SUBSTRUCTURE PATCHING CON ROAD WAYNE I-75 SB ON RAMP OVER ROUGE RIVER AND PLEASANT STREET SUBSTRUCTURE PATCHING CON WAYNE I-75 I-75 OVER FORT STREET SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON Douglas MacArthur WAYNE BELLE ISLE TRAFFIC OVER DETROIT RIVER SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON Bridge 0.000 BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 MACOMB I-94 I-94 OVER CLINTON RIVER CONTROL CHANNEL OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 RAMP (WB BEACH OVER CLINTON RIVER SPILLWAY) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 WB OVER CLINTON RIVER, NORTH AND SOUTH ROADS SCOUR PROTECTION CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 EB OVER CLINTON RIVER, NORTH AND SOUTH ROADS SCOUR PROTECTION CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 EB OVER SELFRIDGE AIR BASE SPUR TRACK HEALER SEALER CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 WB OVER SELFRIDGE AIR BASE SPUR TRACK HEALER SEALER CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 EB OVER CROCKER ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 WB OVER CROCKER ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 EB OVER JOY ROAD SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 WB OVER JOY ROAD SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON MACOMB I-94 21 MILE ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MACOMB I-94 COTTON ROAD OVER I-94 HEALER SEALER CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 EB OVER SALT RIVER PAINTING COMPLETE CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 WB OVER SALT RIVER PAINTING COMPLETE CON MACOMB I-94 I-94 AND NB RAMP OVER FISH CREEK SCOUR PROTECTION CON MACOMB I-94 M-19 NEW HAVEN ROAD OVER I-94 JOINT REPLACEMENT CON MACOMB I-94 26 MILE ROAD OVER I-94 PAINTING - ZONE CON MACOMB I-94 COUNTY LINE ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - DEEP CON MACOMB M-53 M-53 SB OVER CLINTON RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON MACOMB M-53 M-53 NB OVER CLINTON RIVER OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON MACOMB M-53 M-53 OVER BEAVER CREEK SCOUR PROTECTION 0.191 CON OAKLAND I-75 I-75 NB OVER CLINTON RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON OAKLAND I-75 I-75 SB OVER CLINTON RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON OAKLAND I-96 NOVI ROAD OVER I-96 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON OAKLAND M-10 MOUNT VERNON STREET OVER M-10 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON OAKLAND M-10 EVERGREEN ROAD (NORTHBOUND) OVER M-10 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON OAKLAND M-10 EVERGREEN ROAD (SOUTHBOUND) OVER M-10 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON OAKLAND M-10 10 MILE ROAD OVER M-10 SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON OAKLAND M-24 M-24 OVER PAINT CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON OAKLAND M-5 I-96 BL (GRAND RIVER) OVER M-5 OVERLAY - DEEP CON OAKLAND M-5 DRAKE ROAD OVER M-5 DECK PATCHING CON OAKLAND I-75 NB JOSLYN TO I-75 OVER GTW RAILROAD SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR 0.326 CON OAKLAND I-75 FEATHERSTONE ROAD OVER I-75 JOINT REPLACEMENT CON

METRO REGION BRIDGE - PRESERVATION - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 OAKLAND I-75 FEATHERSTONE ROAD OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON OAKLAND I-75 M-24 CONNECTOR EB OVER I-75 HEALER SEALER CON OAKLAND I-75 M-24 CONNECTOR WB OVER I-75 HEALER SEALER CON WAYNE I-94 WB EAST GRAND BOULEVARD OVER I-94 HEALER SEALER CON WAYNE I-94 CHENE RAMP TO I-94 OVER EB GRAND BOULEVARD SUBSTRUCTURE PATCHING CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB RAMP TO M-10 OVER I-94 WB AND M-10 SB OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON WAYNE I-275 SB TO EB I-96 OVER I-275 NB OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 FIVE MILE ROAD OVER I-96 OVERLAY - DEEP CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 SB OVER SCHOOLCRAFT ROAD DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB OVER M-14 SUBSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB COLLECTOR OVER M-14 SUBSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 SB OVER CSX RAILROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB OVER CSX RAILROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 RAMP N OVER CSX RAILROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON DAVISON TO I-75 RAMP OVER GTW RAILROAD, WAYNE I-75 DECK PATCHING - FULL DEPTH CON I-75 AND M-8 (DAVISON) WAYNE I-75 HOLBROOK AVENUE OVER I-75 DECK PATCHING - FULL DEPTH CON WAYNE I-75 SAVANNAH AVENUE OVER I-75 PAINTING COMPLETE CON WAYNE I-75 MEADE STREET OVER I-75 PAINTING COMPLETE CON WAYNE I-75 I-75 OVER RAMP TO M-8 (DAVISON) SUBSTRUCTURE PATCHING CON WAYNE I-75 I-75 AND RAMPS C, D OVER M-8 (DAVISON) AND SERVICE ROAD SOVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-75 M-8 (DAVISON) RAMP OVER I-75 DECK PATCHING - FULL DEPTH CON WAYNE I-75 DAVISON RAMP TO I-75 OVER DEQUINDRE AVENUE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 WB OVER WAYNE ROAD SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB OVER MERRIMAN ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY 0.246 CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 WB OVER MERRIMAN ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB OVER INKSTER ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 WB OVER INKSTER ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 VINING ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 24TH STREET OVER I-94 SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE I-94 CSX RAILROAD OVER I-94 SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE I-94 CONRAIL OVER I-94 SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE I-94 GTW AND CONRAIL OVER I-94 PAINTING COMPLETE CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB OVER WAYNE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB OVER MIDDLEBELT ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 WB OVER MIDDLEBELT ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB OVER ECORSE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 EB OVER BEECH-DALY ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 WB OVER BEECH-DALY ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 I-96 RAMP OVER LAND ROAD JOINT REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-96 I-96 RAMP OVER WB SERVICE ROAD BRIDGE BARRIER RAILING REPLACE CON WAYNE I-96 WEST CHICAGO AVENUE OVER I-96 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON TURN ROADWAY EB TO SB OVER WB AND TO WAYNE I-96 OVERLAY - DEEP CON TURN SERVICE ROADS WAYNE I-96 TURN ROADWAY 3RD LEVEL OVER I-96 ROADWAYS OVERLAY - DEEP CON WAYNE I-96 I-96 RAMP OVER OPEN GROUND OVERLAY - DEEP CON WAYNE I-96 FULLERTON AVENUE OVER I-96 (JEFFRIES FREEWAY) OVERLAY - DEEP CON WAYNE I-96 SCHAEFER ROAD OVER I-96 (JEFFRIES FREEWAY) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 MEYERS ROAD OVER I-96 (JEFFRIES FREEWAY) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 WYOMING AVENUE OVER I-96 (JEFFRIES FREEWAY) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 I-96 WB COLLECTOR OVER RAMP TO M-8 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 WEST GRAND BOULEVARD AND TIREMAN OVER I-96 SUBSTRUCTURE PATCHING CON WAYNE I-96 WEST GRAND BOULEVARD AND TIREMAN OVER I-96 JOINT REPAIR CON WAYNE I-96 WB TO SB TURN ROADWAY OVER TURN ROADWAY U-TURN OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 SERVICE ROAD OVER M-39 (SOUTHFIELD EXPRESSWAY) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-96 I-96 WB COLLECTOR OVER M-39 (SOUTHFIELD EXPRESSWAY) OVERLAY - EPOXY CON

METRO REGION BRIDGE - PRESERVATION - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 I-96 WB MAIN ROADWAY OVER M-39 WAYNE I-96 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON (SOUTHFIELD EXPRESSWAY) WAYNE I-96 I-96 RAMP OVER EASTBOUND SERVICE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE M-14 CONNECTOR OVER M-14 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 SB OVER TONQUISH CREEK SCOUR PROTECTION CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 SB OVER MIDDLE ROUGE RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB OVER MIDDLE ROUGE RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB OVER TONQUISH CREEK SCOUR PROTECTION CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB TO I-96 EB OVER SCHOOLCRAFT ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 SB OVER M-14 BRIDGE BARRIER RAILING REPAIR CON WAYNE I-275 SB TO EB I-96 OVER M-14 WB OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB OVER SCHOOLCRAFT ROAD SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE I-275 I-275 NB COLLECTOR OVER SCHOOLCRAFT ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE M-153 MILLER ROAD OVER M-153 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE M-153 M-153 EB OVER HINES DRIVE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WAYNE M-153 M-153 WB OVER HINES DRIVE JOINT REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE M-153 M-153 WB OVER ROUGE RIVER PIN AND HANGER REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE M-153 M-153 EB OVER ROUGE RIVER OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON WAYNE M-39 M-39 OVER ROUGE RIVER JOINT REPLACEMENT 0.357 CON WAYNE M-39 M-39 NB SERVICE ROAD OVER ROUGE RIVER SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE M-39 M-39 SB SERVICE ROAD OVER ROUGE RIVER SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE Central Avenue CENTRAL AVENUE OVER CANOE STREAM ASPHALT CAP CON WAYNE Oakway Trail OAKWAY TRAIL OVER CANOE STREAM SCOUR PROTECTION CON WAYNE US-24 US-24 NB OVER ROUGE RIVER SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON WAYNE US-24 US-24 SB OVER ROUGE RIVER SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON 1.120 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 OAKLAND I-696 I-696 OVER PEBBLE CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-75 M-102 8 MILE ROAD OVER I-75 DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-94 I-94 WB OVER ECORSE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-96 HUBBELL AVENUE OVER I-96 (JEFFRIES FREEWAY) DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-96 FULLERTON AVENUE OVER I-96 (JEFFRIES FREEWAY) DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-96 I-96 RAMP OVER M-39 RAMP AND EAST SERVICE ROAD DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE M-39 SAWYER AVENUE WALKOVER OVER M-39 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE M-39 VERNE STREET PEDESTRIAN WALKOVER M-39 NEW STRUCTURE CON WAYNE M-39 VASSAR AVENUE WALKOVER OVER M-39 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE Vista Avenue VISTA AVENUE OVER CANOE STREAM BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE US-12 US-12 EB OVER M-39 DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE US-12 US-12 WB OVER M-39 DECK REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE US-24 US-24 SB OVER FRANK AND POET DRAIN SCOUR PROTECTION CON WAYNE US-24 US-24 NB OVER FRANK AND POET DRAIN CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON 0.000 NEW ROADS - GORDIE HOWE INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 WAYNE Gordie Howe International BRIDGE AREA NEW ROAD CON CON CON CON CON WAYNE Gordie Howe International BRIDGE AREA NEW ROAD ROW ROW ROW WAYNE Gordie Howe International BRIDGE AREA NEW ROAD PE PE PE WAYNE Gordie Howe International INTERCHANGE AREA NEW ROAD CON CON CON CON CON WAYNE Gordie Howe International INTERCHANGE AREA NEW ROAD ROW ROW ROW WAYNE Gordie Howe International INTERCHANGE AREA NEW ROAD PE PE PE WAYNE Gordie Howe International PLAZA AREA NEW ROAD CON CON CON CON CON WAYNE Gordie Howe International AT THE GORDIE HOWE INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT CON CON CON CON CON 0.000

METRO REGION FREEWAY RESURFACING PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 OAKLAND M-5 HALSTEAD ROAD TO GRAND RIVER ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 4.454 CON WAYNE I-94 CONNOR TO 8 MILE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 5.491 CON 9.945 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 MACOMB M-3 11 MILE ROAD TO 14 MILE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 6.880 CON OAKLAND I-696 I-275 TO LAHSER ROAD REHABILITATION 8.536 CON OAKLAND M-24 SOUTH OF GOLDENGATE TO NORTH OF HARRIET ROAD REHABILITATION 4.580 CON OAKLAND M-59 TIPISCO LAKE ROAD TO MILFORD ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 3.183 CON OAKLAND US-24 LONG LAKE TO ORCHARD LAKE ROAD AND MAPLE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 4.170 CON WAYNE I-275 SOUTH OF M-153 TO 5 MILE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 6.404 CON WAYNE I-275 NORTHLINE ROAD (SOUTH OF I-94) TO M-153 ROAD REHABILITATION 8.652 CON WAYNE I-94 PELHAM TO EAST OF M-39 ROAD REHABILITATION 3.489 CON WAYNE I-375 SOUTH OF I-75/I-375 INTERCHANGE TO JEFFERSON AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 3.503 CON WAYNE OLD 701 OAKWAY DRIVE, CENTRAL WAY, AND VISTA AT BELLE ISLE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.131 CON WAYNE US-12 (Michigan Avenue) LOTZ ROAD TO PERSHING STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 2.048 CON WAYNE US-24 (Telegraph Road) CARTER TO PENNSYLVANIA ROAD REHABILITATION 2.633 CON WAYNE US-24 GRAND RIVER TO NORTH OF 8 MILE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 1.431 CON 57.640

TRUNKLINE MODERNIZATION I-75 OAKLAND COUNTY COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 OAKLAND I-75 FROM 8 MILE ROAD TO NORTH OF 13 MILE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 5.416 CON CON CON CON CON FROM COOLIDGE HIGHWAY TO NORTH OF SOUTH OAKLAND I-75 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION 2.947 CON CON CON BOULEVARD OAKLAND I-75 FROM NORTH OF 13 MILE ROAD TO COOLIDGE HIGHWAY RECONSTRUCTION 8.878 CON CON CON CON CON OAKLAND I-75 FROM NORTH OF I-696 TO SOUTH OF 12 MILE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION PE PE PE PE OAKLAND I-75 FROM 8 MILE ROAD TO M-59 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT EPE EPE EPE EPE OAKLAND I-75 FROM 8 MILE ROAD TO M-59 REAL ESTATE ACTIVITIES ROW 17.241

TRUNKLINE MODERNIZATION I-94 DETROIT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 WAYNE I-94 AT BURNS STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-94 AT BURNS STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE PE WAYNE I-94 AT CONRAIL RAILROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE PE PE CON WAYNE I-94 AT CONRAIL RAILROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE PE PE CON WAYNE I-94 AT FORTENAC STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE PE CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT FORTENAC STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE PE WAYNE I-94 AT GRAND RIVER AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0.078 CON CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT GRAND RIVER AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE PE WAYNE I-75 AT MILWAUKEE AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON WAYNE I-75 AT MILWAUKEE AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE WAYNE I-94 AT BRUSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT CADILLAC AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE WAYNE I-94 AT CASS AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT CASS AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE WAYNE I-94 AT CHENE STREET AND GRATIOT AVENUE BRIDGES MISCELLANEOUS BRIDGE 0.077 CON CON CON

METRO REGION TRUNKLINE MODERNIZATION I-94 DETROIT - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 WAYNE I-94 AT CHENE STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-94 AT CONCORD AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON AT CONCORD AVENUE, FRENCH ROAD, AND MT ELLIOTT WAYNE I-94 MISCELLANEOUS BRIDGE CON CON CON AVENUE AT CONCORD AVENUE, FRENCH ROAD, AND MT ELLIOTT WAYNE I-94 MISCELLANEOUS BRIDGE CON CON CON AVENUE CONRAIL RAILROAD BETWEEN MT ELLIOT AND CONCORD WAYNE CONRAIL RAILROAD RAIL STRUCTURES CON CON CON AVENUES WAYNE I-94 AT EAST GRAND BOULEVARD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT EAST GRAND BOULEVARD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PE WAYNE I-94 AT FRENCH ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON WAYNE I-94 FROM CONNER AVENUE TO CHENE STREET RECONSTRUCTION ROW ROW ROW ROW ROW WAYNE I-94 FROM CONNER AVENUE TO CHENE STREET RECONSTRUCTION PE PE WAYNE I-94 FROM I-96 TO CONNER AVENUE DYNAMIC LANE USE 6.856 CON CON WAYNE I-94 FROM I-96 TO CONNER AVENUE DYNAMIC LANE USE PE WAYNE I-94 FROM I-96 TO CONNER AVENUE QUEUE WARNING SYSTEM 6.845 CON CON WAYNE I-94 FROM I-96 TO CONNER AVENUE QUEUE WARNING SYSTEM PE WAYNE I-94 FROM ST AUBIN STREET TO FRONTENAC STREET RECONSTRUCTION 1.502 CON WAYNE I-94 FROM ST AUBIN STREET TO FRONTENAC STREET RECONSTRUCTION PE PE PE PE WAYNE I-94 AT M-3 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON WAYNE I-94 AT MT ELLIOT AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON WAYNE I-94 E AT SECOND AND CASS AVENUES MISCELLANEOUS BRIDGE CON CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT SECOND AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON CON WAYNE I-94 AT THIRD STREET BRIDGE BRIDGE REMOVAL CON CON CON WAYNE I-94 FROM I-96 TO EAST OF CONNER AVENUE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT EPE EPE EPE WAYNE I-94 FROM CONNER AVENUE TO CHENE STREET RECONSTRUCTION 9.050 CON CON WAYNE CONRAIL RAILROAD OVER I-94 WEST OF CONNER AVENUE RAIL STRUCTURES CON CON CON 24.408

EMMET 24 CHEBOYGAN 16 PRESQUE ISLE 71 CHARLEVOIX 15 OTSEGO ALPENA 69 4 ANTRIM MONTMORENCY Alpena 5 60 NORTH REGION LEELANAU Gaylord 45 Traverse City BENZIE GRAND KALKASKA CRAWFORD OSCODA ALCONA 10 TRAVERSE 40 20 68 1 28

MANISTEE WEXFORD MISSAUKEE ROSCOMMON OGEMAW IOSCO 51 83 57 72 65 35

NORTH REGION BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 MANISTEE M-55 M-55 OVER PINE RIVER OVERLAY EPOXY CON OGEMAW I-75 BL M-55 OVER RIFLE RIVER JOINT REPLACEMENT CON OGEMAW I-75 BL I-75 BL OVER WEST BRANCH RIFLE RIVER SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON OGEMAW I-75 BL I-75 SB OVER M-55 SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON OGEMAW I-75 BL I-75 NB OVER M-55 SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON OSCODA M-33 M-33 (M-72) OVER AU SABLE RIVER MISCELLANEOUS BRIDGE CON PRESQUE ISLE US-23 US-23 OVER SWAN RIVER BRIDGE BARRIER RAILING REPLACE CON M-18 ROSCOMMON M-18 OVER SPRING BROOK CREEK SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON (E Houghton Lake Drive) WEXFORD M-115 M-115 OVER MANISTEE RIVER OVERLAY DEEP CON 0.000 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 EMMET US-23 US-23 SB OVER I-75 SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON MANISTEE M-55 M-55 OVER MANISTEE RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON MANISTEE US-31 US-31 OVER MANISTEER RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON OGEMAW M-33 (N Williams Street) M-33 OVER HOUGHTON CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON PRESQUE ISLE US-23 US-23 OVER TWIN LAKES OUTLET CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON M-18 ROSCOMMON M-18 OVER BACKUS CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON (N Roscommon Road) 0.000 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALCONA US-23 WASHINGTON STREET TO LAKESHORE DRIVE ROAD REHABILITATION 1.867 CON ALCONA US-23 ALCONA SOUTH COUNTY LIMIT TO GREENBUSH RAILROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 6.170 CON ALCONA US-23 BLACK RIVER ROAD TO SAYERS ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 2.023 CON BENZIE US-31 M-115 SOUTH TO THE BETSIE RIVER RECONSTRUCTION 1.416 CON BENZIE US-31 EAST OF BEULAH TO WEST OF HONOR ROAD REHABILITATION 2.114 CON BENZIE US-31 CRYSTAL DRIVE WEST ROAD REHABILITATION 1.021 CON CHARLEVOIX US-131 CHERRY HILL ROAD TO NORTH OF THUMB LAKE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 1.259 CON BARNARD ROAD/NORWOOD ROAD NORTH TO CHARLEVOIX US-31 RECONSTRUCTION 6.874 CON BARNARD ROAD CHEBOYGAN I-75 LEVERING ROAD TO SOUTH OF HEBRON TOWN HALL ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.881 CON CHEBOYGAN I-75 NORTH OF M-27 TO TOPINABEE MAIL ROUTE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.245 CON CHEBOYGAN M-27 I-75 NB RAMPS TO WOODSIDE PARK ROAD AND POLISH LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 4.966 CON CHEBOYGAN M-68 I-75 EAST TO EAST OF COUNTY LINE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 18.770 CON CHEBOYGAN I-75 SOUTH OF HEBRON TOWN HALL ROAD NORTH TO US-31 ROAD REHABILITATION 5.249 CON CHEBOYGAN US-23 FROM CORDWOOD ROAD TO DUNCAN AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION 6.995 CON CRAWFORD M-72 KALKASKA/CRAWFORD COUNTY LINE TO M-93 ROAD REHABILITATION 6.074 CON EMMET I-75 FROM OLD M-108 NORTH TO MACKINAC BRIDGE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.229 CON EMMET US-31 FROM LIBERTY STREET TO ROSEDALE AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 1.339 CON EMMET US-31 M-119 TO MANVEL ROAD; M-119 FROM US-31 TO PICKEREL ROAD REHABILITATION 0.240 CON EMMET US-31 BLUMKE ROAD NORTH TO MILTON ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 4.117 CON

NORTH REGION REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 GRAND M-113 M-37 INTERSECTION EAST TO CLARK STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 5.661 CON TRAVERSE GRAND M-37 VANCE ROAD TO BLAIR TOWNHALL ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.095 CON TRAVERSE GRAND M-37 BLAIR TOWNHALL ROAD TO M-113 ROAD REHABILITATION 4.024 CON TRAVERSE GRAND US-31 EAST SILVER LAKE ROAD TO CHUMS CORNER MINOR WIDENING 0.623 CON TRAVERSE GRAND US-31 MURCHIE BRIDGE EAST TO GARFIELD AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 0.864 CON TRAVERSE GRAND US-31 DIVISION STREET TO B01 OF 28013 RECONSTRUCTION 1.211 CON TRAVERSE IOSCO US-23 F-41 TO GASTON WAY AND CHANNEL ROAD TO PINE ACRES ROAD REHABILITATION 3.618 CON LEELANAU M-72 FRITZ ROAD TO BUGAI/GRAY ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 12.108 CON MANISTEE M-22 DONTZ ROAD TO 8 MILE ROAD (ONEKAMA) ROAD REHABILITATION 6.564 CON MANISTEE M-55 CLAYBANK ROAD TO UDELL HILLS ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.640 CON MONTMORENCY M-32 JEROME STREET TO HAAS ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 3.381 CON MONTMORENCY M-33 GREASY CREEK ROAD TO M-32 ROAD REHABILITATION 7.045 CON OGEMAW I-75 SKI PARK ROAD TO THE OGEMAW WEST COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.969 CON OGEMAW M-55 WEST OF FAIRVIEW STREET TO WEST OF M-30 RECONSTRUCTION 1.193 CON CHERRY CREEK ROAD TO WEST OF THE M-33/ OSCODA M-33 ROAD REHABILITATION 6.719 CON M-72 JUNCTION PRESQUE ISLE M-68 GLASIER ROAD TO CURTIS ROAD; CEDAR TO STATE PARK ROAD REHABILITATION 18.880 CON ROSCOMMON I-75 MAPLE VALLEY ROAD TO 9 MILE HILL ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 6.785 CON ROSCOMMON M-18 M-157 NORTH TO LANSING ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 6.645 CON ROSCOMMON US-127 FROM M-55 TO MUSKEGON RIVER BRIDGE ROAD REHABILITATION 5.251 CON WEXFORD M-37 BURKETT CREEK RECONSTRUCTION 0.050 CON 187.565

SOUTHWEST REGION CALHOUN VAN BUREN KALAMAZOO 80 39 13 Marshall Kalamazoo BRANCH BERRIEN CASS ST. JOSEPH 12 11 14 78

SOUTHWEST REGION BRIDGE - BIG BRIDGE PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 BERRIEN I-94 BL I-94 BL OVER ST JOSEPH RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON BERRIEN M-63 M-63 OVER ST JOSEPH RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON 0.000

BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 BERRIEN I-94 GLENLORD ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON BERRIEN I-94 CLEVELAND AVENUE OVER I-94 OVERLAY - DEEP CON BERRIEN US-12 US-12 OVER ST JOSEPH RIVER PAINTING COMPLETE CON BERRIEN US-31 US-31 SB OVER US-12 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON BERRIEN US-31 US-31 NB OVER US-12 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON BRANCH I-69 I-69 BL (FENN ROAD) OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON BRANCH I-69 STATE ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON BRANCH I-69 NEWTON ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON BRANCH US-12 (W Chicago Street) US-12 OVER COLDWATER RIVER BRIDGE BARRIER RAILING REPLACE CON CALHOUN I-69 N DRIVE NORTH OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON CALHOUN I-69 GARFIELD ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON CALHOUN I-69 I-69 SB OVER ST JOSEPH RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON CALHOUN I-69 I-69 NB OVER ST JOSEPH RIVER OVERLAY - DEEP CON CALHOUN I-69 JACKSON ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON CALHOUN I-94 24 MILE ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CALHOUN I-94 (Michigan Avenue) I-94 BL MICHIGAN AVENUE OVER I-94 BRIDGE BARRIER RAILING REPLACE CON KALAMAZOO M-43 M-43 OVER KALAMAZOO RIVER JOINT REPLACEMENT CON ST. JOSEPH M-60 M-60 AND M-66 OVER NOTTAWA CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON VAN BUREN I-196 I-196 NB OVER KAL-HAVEN TRAIL AND BLACK RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON VAN BUREN I-196 I-196 SB OVER KAL-HAVEN TRAIL AND BLACK RIVER SCOUR PROTECTION CON VAN BUREN I-94 32ND STREET (CR653) OVER I-94 OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON 0.000 BRIDGE - REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 CALHOUN M-311 (11 Mile Road) M-311 (11 MILE ROAD) OVER KALAMAZOO RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON KALAMAZOO US-131 US-131 NB OVER AMTRAK AND KL AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON KALAMAZOO US-131 US-131 SB OVER AMTRAK AND KL AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON ST. JOSEPH US-131 BR US-131 BR OVER ST JOSEPH RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON 0.000

SOUTHWEST REGION FREEWAY RESURFACING PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 CALHOUN I-194 I-94 TO HAMBLIN AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION 1.673 CON KALAMAZOO US-131 BR WESTNEDGE AVENUE TO US-131 ROAD REHABILITATION 4.291 CON 10.351 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 BERRIEN I-94 BRITAIN AVENUE TO I-196 RECONSTRUCTION 4.721 CON BERRIEN I-94 HIGHLAND ROAD OVER I-94 BRIDGE REMOVAL CON BERRIEN I-94 I-94 BL EB MAIN STREET OVER I-94 BRIDGE REMOVAL CON BERRIEN I-94 TERRITORIAL ROAD OVER I-94 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON NEW STRUCTURE- RELOCATED BERRIEN I-94 NB US-31 and WB I-94 BL OVER I-94 CON ROUTE NEW STRUCTURE - RELOCATED BERRIEN I-94 SB US-31 and EB I-94 BL OVER I-94 CON ROUTE BERRIEN I-94 ST JOSEPH RIVER TO BRITAIN AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 4.086 CON BERRIEN I-94 I-94 OVER YORE AND STOEFFER DRAIN CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON BERRIEN I-94 I-94 EB OVER PIPESTONE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON BERRIEN I-94 I-94 WB OVER PIPESTONE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON BERRIEN I-94 WB I-196 TO 0.7 MILES WEST OF M-140 ROAD REHABILITATION 5.375 CON BERRIEN I-94 OVER SQUAW CREEK, SOUTH OF US-12 CULVERT REPLACEMENT 2.232 CON BERRIEN M-139 OVER BUCKHORN CREEK, NORTH OF ROCKY WEED ROAD CULVERT REPLACEMENT 0.191 CON BERRIEN US-12 DAYTON LAKE ROAD TO MAYFLOWER ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 6.854 CON BERRIEN US-12 M-51 INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION 1.045 CON BERRIEN US-31 US-12 (EXIT 3) TO WALTON ROAD (EXIT 7) ROAD REHABILITATION 4.368 CON BRANCH US-12 (W Chicago Road) ST. JOSEPH COUNTY LINE TO BRONSON ROAD REHABILITATION 6.039 CON CALHOUN I-69 N DRIVE NORTH (EXIT 42) TO EATON COUNTY LINE RECONSTRUCTION 5.004 CON CALHOUN M-199 (25 1/2 Mile Road) 27 MILE ROAD TO I-94 ROAD REHABILITATION 2.938 CON M-199 CALHOUN 25 1/2 MILE ROAD TO 28 MILE ROAD (EATON STREET) ROAD REHABILITATION 2.775 CON (E Michigan Avenue) CALHOUN M-96 EDEN STREET TO I-69 ROAD REHABILITATION 2.850 CON CASS M-40 MARCELLUS HIGHWAY TO VAN BUREN COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 2.933 CON CASS M-51 NILES TO DOWAGIAC ROAD REHABILITATION 11.180 CON CASS M-62 M-62 IN DOWAGIAC ROAD REHABILITATION 1.292 CON KALAMAZOO I-94 EAST OF LOVERS LANE TO EAST OF PORTAGE ROAD MAJOR WIDENING 1.248 CON KALAMAZOO I-94 I-94 OVER PORTAGE ROAD REPLACE BRIDGE, ADD LANES CON KALAMAZOO I-94 KILGORE ROAD OVER I-94 REPLACE BRIDGE, ADD LANES CON KALAMAZOO I-94 PORTAGE ROAD TO SPRINKLE ROAD MAJOR WIDENING 1.182 CON KALAMAZOO I-94 I-94 OVER DAVIS CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT CON KALAMAZOO I-94 I-94 OVER NORFOLK SOUTHERN REPLACE BRIDGE, ADD LANES CON KALAMAZOO I-94 I-94 EB OVER GTW RAILROAD REPLACE BRIDGE, ADD LANES CON KALAMAZOO I-94 I-94 WB OVER GTW RAILROAD REPLACE BRIDGE, ADD LANES CON KALAMAZOO I-94 BL (Stadium Drive) AT HOWARD STREET INTERSECTION MINOR WIDENING 0.500 CON KALAMAZOO I-94 BL (Stadium Drive) EAST OF SENECA TO HOWARD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.232 CON VAN BUREN I-94 EB FROM EAST OF CR 687 TO CR 681 ROAD REHABILITATION 2.355 CON VAN BUREN I-94 EB WEST OF M-51 TO EAST OF M-40 ROAD REHABILITATION 6.280 CON VAN BUREN M-40 72ND STREET TO SOUTH OF LAGRAVE STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 3.402 CON VAN BUREN M-43 I-196 BL TO BLUE STAR HIGHWAY ROAD REHABILITATION 0.762 CON VAN BUREN M-51 SWARTWOOD DRIVE TO DECATUR ROAD REHABILITATION 4.061 CON 84.905

KEWEENAW 42

HOUGHTON 31

ONTONAGON 66 BARAGA 7 LUCE 48 F H GOGEBIC Ishpeming M 27 Newberry MARQUETTE ALGER IRON CHIPPEWA 36 52 2 SCHOOLCRAFT 17 SUPERIOR 75 MACKINAC DICKINSON 49 Crystal Falls 22 DELTA 21 N REGION E Escanaba MENOMINEE 55

I SUPERIOR REGION BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALGER M-28 M-28 OVER SAND RIVER OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON US-41/M-28 OVER RUTH LAKE, THREE LAKES, 4.8 MILES BARAGA US-41 DECK PATCHING CON WEST OF MARQUETTE COUNTY LINE HOUGHTON US-41 US-41 OVER STURGEON RIVER SLOUGH PAINTING COMPLETE CON IRON US-2 US-2 OVER S BR IRON RIVER BRIDGE BARRIER RAILING REPLACE CON MARQUETTE M-95 M-95 OVER TROUT FALLS CREEK SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON MARQUETTE M-95 M-95 OVER MICHIGAMME RIVER SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON MENOMINEE M-35 M-35 OVER DEER CREEK SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR CON ONTONAGON US-45 US-45 OVER ROSELAWN CREEK SUPERSTRUCTURE REPAIR, STEEL CON SCHOOLCRAFT M-28 M-28, M-77 OVER FOX RIVER PAINTING COMPLETE CON 0.000 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALGER US-41 US-41 OVER WEST BRANCH WHITEFISH RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON DICKINSON US-8 US-8 OVER MENOMINEE RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON IRON US-141 US-141 OVER EAST BRANCH NET RIVER OVERLAY - SHALLOW CON MACKINAC US-2 US-2 OVER BREVORT RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON MARQUETTE US-41 OLD M-28 (ABANDONED) OVER CARP RIVER BRIDGE REMOVAL CON MENOMINEE US-2 US-2 OVER BIG CEDAR RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON ONTONAGON M-26 M-26 OVER WEST BRANCH FIRESTEEL RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON ONTONAGON M-26 M-26 OVER EAST BRANCH FIRESTEEL RIVER SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT CON ONTONAGON M-28 M-28 OVER BALTIMORE RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON ONTONAGON M-64 M-64 OVER FLOODWOOD RIVER DECK REPLACEMENT CON 0.000 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ALGER M-28 EAST OF FFR 2275 TO EAST OF MUNISING AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 4.339 CON ALGER M-28 ONOTA STREET TO ALGER/SCHOOLCRAFT COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 15.568 CON BARAGA US-41 COVINGTON AND SPUR TOWNSHIPS, BARAGA COUNTY ROAD REHABILITATION 9.633 CON BARAGA US-41/M-28 M-28 TO NESTORIA HERMAN ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 7.542 CON CHIPPEWA I-75 FROM M-80 TO M-28 ROAD REHABILITATION 8.230 CON CHIPPEWA I-75 I-75 FROM MACKINAC COUNTY LINE NORTHLY TO M-28 ROAD REHABILITATION 0.002 CON CHIPPEWA M-123 M-123 FROM M-28 TO THE NORTH 7.4 MILES ROAD REHABILITATION 7.400 CON CHIPPEWA M-129 FROM 10 MILE ROAD TO 18TH AVENUE IN SAULT STE MARIE ROAD REHABILITATION 8.027 CON CHIPPEWA M-28 FROM I-75 TO M-129 ROAD REHABILITATION 2.693 CON CHIPPEWA M-28 M-28 FROM M-221 TO I-75 ROAD REHABILITATION 7.998 CON CHIPPEWA M-28 FROM EAST OF RACO TO M-221 ROAD REHABILITATION 5.917 CON DELTA US-2 EB US-2 BETWEEN GLADSTONE AND RAPID RIVER ROAD REHABILITATION 5.549 CON

SUPERIOR REGION REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 DICKINSON M-95 (Carpenter Avenue) MORIN STREET TO WOODWARD AVENUE, KINGSFORD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.185 CON DICKINSON US-2 VULCAN TO DICKINSON/MENOMINEE COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 9.480 CON GOGEBIC US-2 (Lead Street) POWDERMILL CREEK TO OLD US-2 RECONSTRUCTION 1.813 CON GOGEBIC US-2 EDDY STREET TO PIERCE STREET, THE CITY OF WAKEFIELD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.040 CON HOUGHTON M-203 SALO ROAD NORTHERLY TO 10.5 STREET, CITY OF CALUMET ROAD REHABILITATION 5.862 CON HOUGHTON US-41 HANCOCK AND FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP, HOUGHTON COUNTY ROAD REHABILITATION 1.673 CON HOUGHTON US-41 (College Avenue) US-41 FROM MACINNES DRIVE TO ISLE ROYAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION 0.893 CON HOUGHTON US-41 NORTH OF AIRPARK BOULEVARD TO NORTH OF BOSTON ROAD REHABILITATION 1.422 CON HOUGHTON US-41 BARAGA COUNTY LINE NORTHERLY TO THE SNAKE RIVER ROAD REHABILITATION 4.452 CON HOUGHTON US-41 US-41 FROM LAKE ANNIE ROAD NORTH TO AGENT STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 7.343 CON IRON M-69 M-69 CRYSTAL FALLS TO SAGOLA, AND M-95 IN SAGOLA ROAD REHABILITATION 11.465 CON KEWEENAW M-26 M-26 FROM PHEONIX TO COPPER HARBOR ROAD REHABILITATION 23.923 CON M-134 FROM HILLTOP DRIVE TO MACKINAC/ MACKINAC M-134 ROAD REHABILITATION 12.277 CON CHIPPEWA COUNTY MACKINAC US-2 EAST LIMITS OF NAUBINWAY TO BORGSTROM ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 5.884 CON MACKINAC US-2 BETWEEN HIAWATHA TRAIL AND CUT RIVER NEW ROADS 1.392 CON MARQUETTE M-95 M-95 FROM THE IRON COUNTY LINE NORTHERLY TO CR LLL ROAD REHABILITATION 11.276 CON MARQUETTE US-41 US-41 FROM BIG CREEK ROAD NORTHERLY TO M-28 ROAD REHABILITATION 3.134 CON MARQUETTE US-41 WEST OF BRICKYARD ROAD NORTHERLY TO IROQUOIS DRIVE ROAD REHABILITATION 6.355 CON MARQUETTE US-41 COUNTY ROAD HQ TO WEST OF BRICKYARD ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 0.932 CON MARQUETTE US-41/M-28 US-41/M-28 FROM FRONT STREET TO COUNTY ROAD HQ ROAD REHABILITATION 2.652 CON MARQUETTE US-41/M-28 FURNACE STREET TO US-41 BYPASS RECONSTRUCTION 0.374 CON MENOMINEE US-41 FROM MENOMINEE TO WALLACE ROAD REHABILITATION 12.336 CON MENOMINEE US-41 US-41 FROM WALLACE TO STEPHENSON ROAD REHABILITATION 5.702 CON SCHOOLCRAFT M-77 M-28 IN SENEY TO SCHOOLCRAFT/ALGER COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 11.960 CON SCHOOLCRAFT US-2 FROM M-149 TO MANISTIQUE CITY LIMIT ROAD REHABILITATION 4.036 CON 231.759

CLINTON 19

INGHAM LIVINGSTON 33 47 EATON Lansing 23 Brighton

UNIVERSITY JACKSON 38 WASHTENAW 81 Jackson

MONROE REGION 58 HILLSDALE LENAWEE 30 46 D J

UNIVERSITY REGION BRIDGE - BIG BRIDGE PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 MONROE I-75 I-75 OVER CONRAIL RR, RAISIN RIVER, FRONT STREET OVERLAY - EPOXY CON 0.000 BRIDGE - PRESERVATION COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 CLINTON I-69 I-69 SB OVER CSX RAILROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 AIRPORT ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 LOWELL ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 I-69 SB OVER EB TURNING ROADWAY OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 I-69 NB OVER EB TURNING ROADWAY OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 I-69 SB OVER I-96 BL GRAND RIVER AVENUE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 I-69 NB OVER I-96 BL GRAND RIVER AVENUE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 I-69 SB OVER I-96 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 FRANCIS ROAD OVER EB AND WB TURNING ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON CLINTON I-69 EB TURNING ROADWAY OVER I-96 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 AINGER ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON EATON I-69 I-96 EB OVER GRAND RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-96 WB OVER GRAND RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB TO I-96 EB OVER GRAND RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB OVER INDIAN CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY 0.506 CON EATON I-69 I-69 NB OVER INDIAN CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 NB OVER BATTLE CREEK RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB ON RAMP OVER INDIAN CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 NB OFF RAMP OVER INDIAN CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB OVER BIG CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 NB OVER BIG CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB OVER BATTLE CREEK RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 NB OVER GTW RAILROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB OVER GTW RAILROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 BASELINE HIGHWAY OVER I-69 OVERLAY - DEEP CON EATON I-69 BUTTERFIELD HIGHWAY M-78 OVER I-69 SHERWOOD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 BL OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 KALAMO ROAD OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 ISLAND HIGHWAY OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 SB OVER STINE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 FIVE POINT HIGHWAY OVER I-69 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON EATON I-69 I-69 NB OVER STINE ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON INGHAM I-96 HAGADORN ROAD OVER I-96 DECK PATCHING CON INGHAM I-96 MERIDIAN ROAD OVER I-96 DECK PATCHING CON INGHAM I-96 ZIMMER ROAD OVER I-96 EB DECK PATCHING CON INGHAM I-96 ZIMMER ROAD OVER I-96 WB DECK PATCHING CON INGHAM I-96 BL (S Cedar Street) I-96 BL OVER GTW, SOUTH STREET AND RED CEDAR OVERLAY - EPOXY CON

UNIVERSITY REGION BRIDGE - PRESERVATION - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 INGHAM I-96 BL (S Cedar Street) US-27 BR OVER CSX RAILROAD AND WB I-96 BR OVERLAY - EPOXY CON JACKSON US-127 US-127 NB OVER CONRAIL OVERLAY - EPOXY CON JACKSON US-127 US-127 SB OVER CONRAIL OVERLAY - EPOXY CON JACKSON US-127 SPRINGPORT ROAD OVER US-127 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MONROE I-75 LUNA PIER ROAD OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MONROE I-75 ALLEN COVE ROAD OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MONROE I-75 OTTER CREEK ROAD OVER I-75 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON MONROE I-75 I-75 AND M-125 CONNECTOR OVER I-75 OVERLAY - DEEP 0.053 CON MONROE I-75 I-75 RAMP B OVER I-75 OVERLAY - DEEP CON WASHTENAW I-94 I-94 OVER I-94 BL OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 I-94 EB OVER MILL CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 I-94 WB OVER MILL CREEK OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 I-94 EB OVER CONRAIL OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 NOTTEN ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 KALMBACH ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - DEEP CON WASHTENAW I-94 M-52 OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 FREER ROAD OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 OLD US-12 OVER I-94 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW I-94 JACKSON AVENUE WB, I-94 BR OVER I-94 RAMP OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 NB OVER CONRAIL AND HURON RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 SB OVER CONRAIL AND HURON RIVER OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 NB, I-94 BL OVER PACKARD ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 SB, I-94 BL OVER PACKARD ROAD OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 NB OVER US-23 BR OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 SB OVER US-23 BR OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 NB OVER HURON RIVER DRIVE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 US-23 SB OVER HURON RIVER DRIVE OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 GEDDES ROAD OVER US-23 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 EARHART ROAD OVER US-23 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 PLYMOUTH-ANN ARBOR OVER US-23 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON WASHTENAW US-23 ELLSWORTH ROAD OVER US-23 OVERLAY - EPOXY CON 0.559 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 INGHAM I-496 I-496 WB RAMP OVER CSX RAILROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0.173 CON INGHAM I-96 BL I-96 BL OVER HORESBROOK CREEK CULVERT REPLACEMENT 0.000 CON JACKSON M-60 M-60 EB RAMP I-94 OVER I-94 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 1.564 CON JACKSON M-60 M-60 WB RAMP I-94 OVER I-94 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON LIVINGSTON I-96 I-96 BL (ON RAMP) OVER I-96 WB DECK REPLACEMENT 0.000 CON MONROE I-275 BIKE PATH BIKE PATH OVER GTW RAILROAD BRIDGE REMOVAL 0.000 CON MONROE I-275 BIKE PATH BIKE PATH OVER CONRAIL BRIDGE REMOVAL CON MONROE I-75 LAPLAISANCE ROAD OVER I-75 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 1.325 CON I-75 MONROE I-75 NB OVER MUDDY CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0.000 CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 MONROE I-75 SB OVER MUDDY CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 MONROE I-75 NB OVER OTTER CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 MONROE I-75 SB OVER OTTER CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 MONROE I-75 NB OVER HALFWAY CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0.000 CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE I-75 SB OVER HALFWAY CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE I-75 NB OVER BAY CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway)

UNIVERSITY REGION BRIDGE REPLACEMENT - Continued COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 I-75 N MONROE I-75 SB OVER BAY CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE I-75 NB OVER POWER COUNTY RAILROAD SPUR BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE I-75 SB OVER POWER COUNTY RAILROAD SPUR BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE I-75 NB OVER BAY CREEK ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE I-75 SB OVER BAY CREEK ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) I-75 N MONROE ERIE ROAD OVER I-75 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON (Detroit-Toledo Freeway) 3.062 FREEWAY RESURFACING PROGRAM COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 JACKSON US-127 EB I-94 OFF RAMP TO PARNELL ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.307 CON 1.307 REPAIR AND REBUILD ROADS COUNTY ROUTE (COMMON NAME) LOCATION TYPE OF WORK LENGTH 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 CLINTON I-69 I-96 TO AIRPORT ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 5.391 CON CLINTON Old US-27 OLD US-27 FROM PRATT TO TAFT ROAD REHABILITATION 3.720 CON CLINTON US-127 US-127 FROM SOUTH OF M-43 TO SOUTH OF CLARK ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 5.149 CON EATON I-496 I-496 FROM I-96 TO LANSING ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 4.529 CON I-69 SOUTH OF THE CALHOUN/ EATON I-69 ROAD REHABILITATION 15.040 CON EATON COUNTY LINE TO M-50 EATON M-50 LONG HIGHWAY TO HALLAWOOD DRIVE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.769 CON HILLSDALE M-99 (Hudson Road) NORTH STEAMBURG ROAD TO SOUTH STEAMBURG ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 1.555 CON HILLSDALE M-99 (Homer Road) STRAIT COURT TO ADAMS STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 5.902 CON HILLSDALE Old M-99 (Beck Road) OLD M-99 (BECK ROAD), BOTH SECTION ROAD REHABILITATION 2.111 CON M-43 INGHAM PARK LAKE ROAD TO DOBIE ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 2.073 CON (Grand River Avenue) INGHAM M-99 FROM NORTH OF HOLT HIGHWAY TO EDGEWOOD NORTH RECONSTRUCTION 2.376 CON JACKSON I-94 I-94 AT ELM ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 1.499 CON JACKSON I-94 ELM ROAD OVER I-94 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON JACKSON I-94 MICHIGAN AVENUE TO M-60 RECONSTRUCTION 7.583 CON JACKSON I-94 I-94 UNDER LANSING AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION 0.464 CON JACKSON I-94 LANSING AVENUE OVER I-94 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CON JACKSON M-60 EMERSON ROAD TO RENFREW ROAD ROAD REHABILITATION 2.528 CON NORTH OF HENRY ROAD TO JACKSON/ JACKSON US-127 ROAD REHABILITATION 5.037 CON INGHAM COUNTY LINE M-50 LENAWEE M-52 TO SUNSET STREET ROAD REHABILITATION 2.527 CON (W Chicago Boulevard) LENAWEE US-223 ROME ROAD TO INDUSTRIAL DRIVE ROAD REHABILITATION 8.352 CON LIVINGSTON I-96 I-96 FROM CHILSON TO DORR ROAD REHABILITATION 3.708 CON LIVINGSTON M-36 M-36 KELLY DRIVE TO WEST CITY LIMITS OF PINCKNEY ROAD REHABILITATION 2.378 CON LIVINGSTON M-59 WEST OF LAKENA ROAD TO THE COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.309 CON LIVINGSTON US-23 NB NB US-23 BETWEEN 8 MILE AND M-36 OPERATION IMPROVEMENTS 0.413 CON MONROE I-75 I-75 FROM OHIO STATE LINE TO ERIE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 5.060 CON MONROE I-75 I-75 FROM ERIE ROAD TO OTTER CREEK ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 3.731 CON MONROE US-24 READY TO WAYNE COUNTY LINE ROAD REHABILITATION 3.347 CON WASHTENAW I-94 WASHTENAW/JACKSON COUNTY LINE TO FREER ROAD REHABILITATION 6.542 CON M-17/US-12 BR NORMAL TO MICHIGAN, I-94 TO MICHIGAN, WASHTENAW ROAD REHABILITATION 2.307 CON (Cross Street) HAMILTON TO ECORSE WASHTENAW US-12 US-12 FELDKAMP TO SALINE WEST CITY LIMITS ROAD REHABILITATION 3.868 CON WASHTENAW US-23 BR (Main Street) I-94 BL TO M-14 ROAD REHABILITATION 1.239 CON WASHTENAW US-23 NORTH OF PLYMOUTH ROAD TO I-94 ROAD REHABILITATION 6.784 CON 122.291

MDOT Region Contact Information Bay Region Office Southwest Region Office 5859 Sherman Road 1501 Kilgore Road Saginaw, MI 48604 Kalamazoo, MI 49001 Phone: 989-754-7443 Phone: 269-337-3900 Fax: 989-754-8122 Toll-free: 866-535-6368 Robert Ranck, Region Engineer Fax: 269-337-3916 Demetrius Parker, Region Engineer Grand Region Office 1420 Front Ave., N.W. Superior Region Office Grand Rapids, MI 49504 1818 Third Ave. North Phone: 616-451-3091 Escanaba, MI 49829 Toll-free: 888-815-6368 Phone: 906-786-1800 Fax: 616-451-0707 Toll-free: 888-414-6368 Erick Kind, Region Engineer Fax: 906-789-9775 Aaron Johnson, Region Engineer Metro Region Office 18101 W. Nine Mile Road University Region Office Southfield, MI 48075 4701 W. Michigan Ave. Phone: 248-483-5100 Jackson, MI 49201 Fax: 248-569-3103 Phone: 517-750-0401 Tony Kratofil, Region Engineer Fax: 517-750-4397 Paul Ajegba, Region Engineer North Region Office 1088 M-32 East Gaylord, MI 49735 Phone: 989-731-5090 Toll-free: 888-304-6368 Fax: 989-731-0536 Scott Thayer, Region Engineer

80 2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Acronyms and Definitions Acronyms Definitions ACIP Airport Capital Improvement Program DBFM (design-build-finance- BRT Bus Rapid Transit maintain) is an innovative contracting CATA Capital Area Transportation Authority model that uses the DB methodology, CMAQ Congestion Mitigation Air Quality but transfers risk to the contractor CPM Capital Preventive Maintenance for the long-term performance of the CTF Comprehensive Transportation Fund work. The DBFM team is responsible DDOT Detroit Department of Transportation for not only designing and building the project, but to maintain it for DDP Downtown Detroit Partnership a period between 25 to 30 years; DG Dense Grade accordingly, they have a vested DNR Michigan Department of Natural Resources interest in ensuring it performs well in GGSP Gap Grade Superpave order to manage their long-term risk FAA Federal Aviation Administration and be paid back over time as it hits FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act agreed upon standards. Because of FHWA Federal Highway Administration this risk transfer, it is also possible for FTA Federal Transit Administration the financial arm of the DBFM team HTF Highway Trust Fund to spread MDOT repayments over the LBO Local Bus Operating term of the maintenance period. This MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century frees up more money in the short term MASP Michigan Aviation System Plan for MDOT to invest in other parts of transportation system. MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MTF Michigan Transportation Fund OGDC Open Graded Drainage Course PCI Pavement Condition Index QLINE M-1 RAIL in Detroit R & R Road Rehabilitation and Reconstruction RSL Remaining Service Life RTA Regional Transportation Authority of Southeast Michigan SAF State Aeronautics Fund SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan STF State Trunkline Fund STIP State Transportation Improvement Program TIP Transportation Improvement Program TSC Transportation Service Center TZD Toward Zero Deaths

2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Notes

83 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

2019-2023 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

VOLUME XX

Draft by the State Transportation Commission on July 21, 2018

Providing the highest quality integrated transportation services for economic benefit and improved quality of life.